Author Topic: Incredible Discovery (Read 503 times)

Tourmalet · « **on:** October 25, 2020, 02:46:02 PM »

Scientists have discovered that people will believe anything when scientists say they discovered it.

Struthio · « **Reply #1 on:** October 25, 2020, 05:53:25 PM »

People knew that for quite some time. But now they can run around and say "we do not just believe it, we now know it".

Incredulous · « **Reply #2 on:** October 25, 2020, 07:32:19 PM »

Piltdown Man: Infamous Fake Fossil

By Jessie Szalay 30 September 2016

In 1912 Arthur Smith Woodward, a paleontologist with the Natural History Museum, and Charles Dawson, an amateur antiquarian, reported the discovery of a new species of early human at Piltdown in England which they believed could date back one million years. It was given the name Eoanthropus dawsoni.
(Image: © Courtesy Wikimedia)

In 1912, a British amateur archeologist named Charles Dawson wrote to London's Natural History Museum claiming to have discovered the missing evolutionary link between apes and humans in a fossil he had dug up in Piltdown, Sussex. This was the beginning of the Piltdown Man hoax, one of the most successful and consequential hoaxes in scientific history. Dawson's Piltdown Man was conclusively established as a hoax in 1953, after decades of leading scientists down the wrong path of evolutionary study.

The Piltdown Man was a collection of "fossils" assumed to be from the same Pleistocene- or Pliocene-era early human, according to Isabelle De Groote, a professor at the Research Centre in Evolutionary Anthropology and Palaeoecology at Liverpool John Moores University and author of the 2016 article "New genetic and morphological evidence suggests a single hoaxes created ‘Piltdown Man.'"

The Piltdown Man fossils were found over several years and included a mandible and set of teeth, parts of a human-like skull and a canine tooth. There were also rudimentary stone tools, a carved slab of bone and fragments of fossils from Pleistocene- or Pliocene-era mammals, De Groote told Live Science.
The fossils had the same dark reddish-brown color as the surrounding Pleistocene or Pliocene gravel pits in which they were uncovered. The mandible resembled an ape's, while the skull appeared human, and the canine tooth could have belonged to either species. Taken together, the fossils seemed to suggest that their owner exhibited characteristics of both apes and humans and was, therefore, the missing link.
In reality, the jawbones and tooth came from an orangutan and the skulls from medieval human bones, De Groote said.

For more than a century, the identity of the creator of the fake fossils was unknown, but De Groote's study, published in August 2016 by Royal Society Open Science, determined that Dawson was the most likely sole forger.

Historical background

According to Peter Hancock, author of "Hoax Springs Eternal: The Psychology of Cognitive Deception," the Piltdown Man hoax really begins with the 1859 publication of Charles Darwin's "On the Origin of Species." If Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection was true, people thought, there should be fossils that clearly connected apes to modern humans. This connecting fossil came to be called the missing link. The search for it became a race that overtook the 19^th century archaeological community.

Scientists in Belgium, France and Germany uncovered early human fossils that shined light on human evolution. Among these findings was the highly significant jaw fossil from Homo heidelbergensis, found in Germany in 1907. Geopolitical ties between the United Kingdom and the continent were relatively weak; the tensions that would come to light in World War I were already brewing. The British were jealous of these findings and wanted to find their own "early man" to bring glory to England. Hancock wrote that the French teased the British about their lack of fossils, calling them "pebble hunters."

Into this environment came Charles Dawson, a solicitor and amateur archaeologist who had previously donated a collection of fossils to the British Museum. According to Keith Stuart Thomson's article in the journal American Scientist, “Piltdown Man: The Great English Mystery Story,” Dawson had a history of deception: he had plagiarized a historical account of Hastings Castle and had come into his estate through pretending to be an official part of the Sussex Archaeological Society. Unfortunately, these facts were unknown; if people had been aware of them, perhaps they would not have taken his Piltdown fossils seriously.

English scientists had determined that they were most likely to uncover a British early man in the Pleistocene gravel pits in Southern England. One day, Dawson saw that some gravel had been excavated to build a pond in Piltdown, Sussex. He became fascinated with the spot and set up investigations.

'Uncovering' fake fossils

The exact chronology of the early Piltdown findings is unclear. According to Thomson, Dawson said that in 1908 some gravel pit workers came to him with something "like a coconut" that was presumably a skull. He asked a local chemistry teacher named Samuel Allinson Woodhead to join him in an excavation, but the two found only some pieces of ironstone that resembled the "skull." In 1909, Dawson partnered with a Jesuit named Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who would become one of the suspects in the creation of the forged fossils. The two excavated together over the next few years and were occasionally joined by other amateur archaeologists. They found various remains thought to be from early humans. At some point between 1909 and 1911, Dawson asked Woodhead about treating bones to make them look like fossils, according to Thomson.

Historians know that in February 1912, Dawson reached out to Arthur Smith Woodward, keeper of geology at the Natural History Museum and a friend of Dawson's. According to De Groote, Dawson wrote that he had found a "thick portion of a human skull which will rival H. heidelbergensis in solidity." He showed Smith Woodward pieces of supposed skull.

According to Michael Farquhar, author of "A Treasury of Deception: Liars, Misleaders, Hoodwinkers, and the Extraordinary True Story of History’s Greatest Hoaxes, Fakes, and Frauds," Smith Woodward was so excited by the findings that he dedicated the rest of his life to studying them. He traveled with Dawson to the Piltdown site and began excavating with him. They found a mandible, a set of teeth, more skull fragments and primitive tools. They suggested that these remnants had all belonged to the same individual. These fake fossils became known as Piltdown Man I.
Smith Woodward constructed the fragments into a skull that he hypothesized was the missing link, a human ancestor that lived 500,000 years ago.

Piltdown Man success

According to the Natural History Museum, London, Smith Woodward and Dawson announced their findings at a Geological Society in December of 1912. They called their discovery Eoanthropus dawsoni (Dawson's dawn man). While there were a few skeptics, mostly outside of the United Kingdom, most of the public and scientific community accepted their story as true and exciting.

Dawson and Smith Woodward continued their excavations until 1914. They uncovered the canine tooth and carved bone slab, which became known as the "cricket bat" because of its shape, said De Groote. The idea that this early Englishman had actually played a rudimentary form of cricket became popular.
Their work together was disrupted by World War I and Dawson's declining health. Nevertheless, in 1915, Dawson wrote to Smith Woodward that he had uncovered more remains about two miles from the others. These remains became known as Piltdown II, and, according to Farquhar, they quieted the few remaining skeptics. The president of the American Museum of Natural History wrote that "If there's Providence hanging over the affairs of prehistoric man it certainly manifested itself in this case." Textbooks began to include Eoanthropus dawsoni.

In "The Last Lost World: Ice Ages, Human Origins, and the Invention of the Pleistocene," authors Lydia Pyne and Stephen J. Pyne describe the reasoning behind the public and scientific community's belief that the Piltdown Man was real. In addition to containing bones that resembled both ape and human, the skull was bigger than previous early human skull discoveries. This seemed to suggest that the Piltdown Man was a more highly evolved early human. That the largest early human skull was found in England appealed to British nationalism. Its discovery followed a similar narrative to that of genuine artifacts. "In brief, it fit so many gaps in knowledge, ambition, and desire that it might have been explicitly contrived to do so," the authors wrote. "And it was."

In 1916, Dawson died. This left Smith Woodward as the main advocate for the Piltdown Man, and he filled the role enthusiastically. He began referring to the Piltdown Man as "The Earliest Englishman" and published a short book with the title. According to the Pynes, other high-profile British scientists expressed fascination with the Piltdown Man, as did Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, author of the Sherlock Holmes books. In the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, Clarence Darrow introduced the Piltdown Man as evidence for human evolution in his defense of John Scopes.

Hoax revealed

More early human fossils — real ones — were discovered throughout the 1920s and '30s. As they came to light, scientists noticed that they had little in common with the Piltdown Man. When chemical tests that would help re-examine the Piltdown Man were developed in the late 1940s, scientists took advantage of them, according to Kristi Lew, author of "."

Joseph Weiner, Kenneth Oakley and Wilfred Le Gros Park were three such inquiring scientists from Oxford and the British Museum. They subjected the Piltdown Man fossils to a series of rigorous chemical tests, which ultimately showed that they were fakes. A fluoride-based test dated the upper part of the skull at about 500 years old and the jawbone at a few decades old. A nitrogen analysis confirmed the results. Additionally, the tests showed that the fossils had been stained with iron and potassium dichromate to make them appear ancient. Scientists noticed that the teeth in the jaw had been filed down to make them appear human-like. The jaw was broken where it would attach to the cranium, thus allowing for smooth reattachment, according to Pyne and Pyne, and the partial upper skull suggested a large cranium without specifying measurements so gullible scientists could project their assumptions onto it.

Weiner, Oakley and Park published their findings in Time magazine in November 1953, and the world learned that the Piltdown Man was a fake. Further findings published in 1955 showed that the (real) mammalian fossils and rudimentary tools were planted at the site. The "cricket bat" was likely fossilized elephant bone recently carved with a steel knife, said De Groote. Later, they determined that the jaw and canine tooth came from an orangutan.
The Piltdown hoax was revealed, but significant damage had already been done. It led scientists down the wrong path in understanding human evolution for decades. Because scientists assumed that it was the missing link, some were skeptical of other genuine finds that did not match with the narrative the Piltdown Man suggested. This was especially true of discoveries made in Asia and Africa, such as the 1924 discovery of the Taung Child, because they took the focus away from Europe, according to Pyne and Pyne.

A hoaxer identified

One mystery still remained: who had made the fake fossils? Most experts believed that Dawson had a role in the forgery, but many thought he had help. Smith Woodward was a likely accomplice, according to Pyne and Pyne. Francis Thackery, a South African paleoanthropologist told Science magazine that he believed Teilhard de Chardin, who had worked with Dawson on early Piltdown excavations, aided Dawson. Other suspects have included Martin Hinton, a volunteer on the Piltdown dig who disliked Smith Woodward, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who lived near the Piltdown site and belonged to the same amateur archaeology club as Dawson.

In August 2016, De Groote and her team published "New genetic and morphological evidence suggests a single hoaxes created ‘Piltdown Man,'" a study that indicated the fossils had been made by a single forger, likely Dawson, thereby solving the mystery for all but the most skeptic.
"Techniques such as microCT scanning, ancient DNA analyses, 3D microscopy etc., have only been available a number of years and we wanted to apply those to the study of Piltdown," she said. The team conducted these tests on the human and ape material from the Piltdown site.

"Extracting DNA from such 'messed-about-with' specimens is not an easy task," said De Groote, but eventually the team was able to determine that not only did the jaw and teeth specimens belong to apes, they came from the same orangutan. De Groote suspects the forger got them at a curiosity shop or from a museum collection; Dawson would have had access to both. The tests also revealed that the cranial bones came from two or three medieval humans, "evidently purposely selected for their cranial thickness," she said.

Among De Groote's findings was another forgery technique. "Several of the bones and teeth were loaded with gravel that was held in place with pebble plugs, all originating from sediment similar to that found at the Piltdown site," she said. The gravel and pebble plugs were held in place with distinctive putty, stained reddish brown like the rest of the bones. De Groote thinks gravel was added to make the bones heavier since fossils weigh more than new bones.
"The consistency in the modus operandi and the use of a limited number of specimens to create both the Piltdown I and Piltdown II material are indicative of a single forger," De Groote said. She believes that Dawson was man behind the hoax.

Dawson was the only person directly associated with the Piltdown II site, and her studies reveal that the forger, though possessing a relatively strong technique, was not a trained conservator. De Groote noted that his early letters reveal an obsession with joining the archaeological Royal Society, and he lamented not yet having made a big discovery. In 1913, he was finally nominated to join because of the Piltdown finds.

De Groote believes that solving the Piltdown hoax and identifying the forger is still important today. The hoax continues to be a relevant cautionary tale for scientists "not to see what they want to see, but to remain objective and to subject even their own findings to the strongest scientific scrutiny," she wrote in her study. "The field of palaeoanthropology is still guilty of fossil hoarding/guarding and exclusivity, but recently, there have been some welcome developments … Such progress should help us avoid the mistakes that the scientific community made when Eoanthropus dawsoni was first announced."

Seraphina · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2020, 07:47:22 PM »

Piltdown man? Let me tell you what I found buried in Chernobyl, Meltdown man! And we know he must have traveled overland and by boat because another was found near Fukushima, Japan.

Matthew · « **Reply #4 on:** October 26, 2020, 02:31:48 AM »

Piltdown man wasn't the only faked "missing link" from the 1930's - 1970's.

Basically ALL OF THEM were. They still haven't found a missing link -- for any species, much less Man.

But just like the Mainstream Media, when caught, just posts a retraction at the bottom of page 23 the next day (when the error was the headline on page 1!), scientists never come out publicly and advertise how they were wrong. The truth ends up being suppressed, downplayed, ignored, buried, etc.

Incredulous · « **Reply #5 on:** October 26, 2020, 08:04:58 AM »

Quote from: Seraphina on October 25, 2020, 07:47:22 PM

Piltdown man? Let me tell you what I found buried in Chernobyl, Meltdown man! And we know he must have traveled overland and by boat because another was found near Fukushima, Japan.

And both catastrophic events were assisted by the ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan.

Chernobyl was in the Ukraine, so we know the hand behind it.

The Fukushima nuclear reactor had Israeli Mossad in their security department.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #6 on:** October 26, 2020, 08:53:02 AM »

It's amazing how many articles you see beginning with the phrase: "Scientists are baffled ..." It's practically become a meme.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #7 on:** October 26, 2020, 08:59:20 AM »

Quote from: Matthew on October 26, 2020, 02:31:48 AM

Piltdown man wasn't the only faked "missing link" from the 1930's - 1970's.

Basically ALL OF THEM were. They still haven't found a missing link -- for any species, much less Man.

But just like the Mainstream Media, when caught, just posts a retraction at the bottom of page 23 the next day (when the error was the headline on page 1!), scientists never come out publicly and advertise how they were wrong. The truth ends up being suppressed, downplayed, ignored, buried, etc.

So I was driving around and listening to EWTN radio the other day, and there's one of these NO apologists, Dr. David Anders, and he was asked a question about evolution. He quoted JP2 about evolution being "not just a theory" and said that there's nothing inimical between it and Catholic theology. Even from the NO listeners he got a bunch of "hate mail" over it, and rightly so. He in fact was claiming that DARWINIAN evolution is accepted science. He couldn't even get that straight. Darwinian evolution has been rejected by mainstream science.

Also, with regard to Wojtyla's "not just a theory" ... that is garbage. As the one site, dismantledevolution.com (cited here before), clearly demonstrated, it can never be anything more than a theory, since it has never been observed and is not observable and is not falsifiable, thereby not meeting the criteria for being anything more than a theory. And, then, even as a theory, it doesn't work as there's too much contrary evidence. Most higher-education evolutionists, even the atheists, have rejected Darwin. I've seen atheists professors claim that there must have been intelligent design due to the gain of information that takes place in evolution over time ... and yet somehow they still clung to their atheism, saying that they would not speculate about the nature of said intelligent design.

That was one of the (several) huge blunders by Pope Pius XII, to say that evolution was acceptable for Catholics. Wojtyla of course took it to the next level.

ByzCat3000 · « **Reply #8 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:08:48 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on October 26, 2020, 08:59:20 AM

So I was driving around and listening to EWTN radio the other day, and there's one of these NO apologists, Dr. David Anders, and he was asked a question about evolution. He quoted JP2 about evolution being "not just a theory" and said that there's nothing inimical between it and Catholic theology. Even from the NO listeners he got a bunch of "hate mail" over it, and rightly so. He in fact was claiming that DARWINIAN evolution is accepted science. He couldn't even get that straight. Darwinian evolution has been rejected by mainstream science.

Also, with regard to Wojtyla's "not just a theory" ... that is garbage. As the one site, dismantledevolution.com (cited here before), clearly demonstrated, it can never be anything more than a theory, since it has never been observed and is not observable and is not falsifiable, thereby not meeting the criteria for being anything more than a theory. And, then, even as a theory, it doesn't work as there's too much contrary evidence. Most higher-education evolutionists, even the atheists, have rejected Darwin. I've seen atheists professors claim that there must have been intelligent design due to the gain of information that takes place in evolution over time ... and yet somehow they still clung to their atheism, saying that they would not speculate about the nature of said intelligent design.

That was one of the (several) huge blunders by Pope Pius XII, to say that evolution was acceptable for Catholics. Wojtyla of course took it to the next level.

IDK about JPII, but Pius XII limited it to evolution of the human body, and even then he suggested that the Church could eventually condemn it, just that he hadn't yet

Yeti · « **Reply #9 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:13:33 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on October 26, 2020, 08:59:20 AM

So I was driving around and listening to EWTN radio the other day

.

EEEEEEEWWWWTN

Ladislaus · « **Reply #10 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:23:56 AM »

Quote from: ByzCat3000 on October 26, 2020, 09:08:48 AM

IDK about JPII, but Pius XII limited it to evolution of the human body, and even then he suggested that the Church could eventually condemn it, just that he hadn't yet

I get it, he didn't teach evolution, but he made a huge mistake in allowing it to be entertained by Catholics. He put only the constraint on it that God had to create and infuse the immortal soul, leaving it open for people to claim that human beings did simply evolve from monkeys, etc., and that somehow matter intelligently organized and designed itself. So, basically, it's no holds barred so long as you hold that God put the soul into the body.

ByzCat3000 · « **Reply #11 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:31:16 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on October 26, 2020, 09:23:56 AM

I get it, he didn't teach evolution, but he made a huge mistake in allowing it to be entertained by Catholics. He put only the constraint on it that God had to create and infuse the immortal soul, leaving it open for people to claim that human beings did simply evolve from monkeys, etc., and that somehow matter intelligently organized and designed itself. So, basically, it's no holds barred so long as you hold that God put the soul into the body.

I've read Humani Generis before, and I've recommended it to people who are really struggling with reconciling science and faith.

All that being said, not to play the "intent" argument, but I doubt Pius XII intended for people to be able to believe matter "intelligently organized itself." I suspect if you asked him, he'd say at least you have to believe God designed the process.

Whether this was imprudent or not, I'm inclined to think it wasn't, but I may be wrong. Perhaps its being raised baptist that gives me a bit of an anti-fundamentalist streak.

And I don't believe humans evolved either, I just kind of see bodily evolution as arguably somewhat irrelevant, given the HG parameters.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #12 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:31:29 AM »

Quote from: Yeti on October 26, 2020, 09:13:33 AM

.
EEEEEEEWWWWTN

Sure, I like to hear what they're up to. What I've found is that they're mostly orthodox with these extremely notable exceptions ...

1) EENS ... they're a disaster on this and basically promote religious indifferentism.
2) Sacraments ... they don't consider them as necessary for salvation, but just as helps and tangible reassurances to us of the grace received.
3) Historicity of Sacred Scripture ... believing it's OK to consider most of the Bible to be mere allegory. (the context of the Evolution doctrine)
4) Refuse to criticize Bergoglio even when it sounds like they want to ("it's not my job to criticize the Pope" ... such as with regard to his recent promotion of gαy marriage).
5) in anti-Prot apologetics, they sometimes water down Catholics doctrines to make them more palatable to Prots.

Really the core error of Vatican II is the subjectivized soteriology ... and the new ecclesiology that inevitably results from this. Bishop Williamson has rightly explained that subjectivism is the core error of Vatican II, the major paradigm shift from Traditional Catholic teaching. But due to the Feeney "stigma," they're afraid to touch EENS with a 10-foot pole, even though their refusal to deal with it leaves them in a state of contradiction with themselves.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #13 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:34:50 AM »

Quote from: ByzCat3000 on October 26, 2020, 09:31:16 AM

I've read Humani Generis before, and I've recommended it to people who are really struggling with reconciling science and faith.

All that being said, not to play the "intent" argument, but I doubt Pius XII intended for people to be able to believe matter "intelligently organized itself." I suspect if you asked him, he'd say at least you have to believe God designed the process.

I do not doubt this, but unfortunately it needed to be said. That's why I call it a mistake and a blunder ... because he didn't explicitly put the proper constraints on it ... rather than a positive error.

He did something similar with NFP. He "opened the door" to it. He did not really intend to teach it, but his speech to the Midwives entailed some obvious (and unnecessary) public speculation. Prior to that, the Holy Office instructed that the subject must remain in the Confessional and only entertained with the greatest prudence and under all the necessary conditions. Again, Pius XII did not put the proper constraints on it, but just left the restrictions to some "grave", i.e. "serious" or "non-trivial" consideration, which has gradually been explained away and eroded ... to the point that we now have NFP being used as Catholic birth control. See, the Church has ALWAYS been very careful about opening doors to this kind of thing, anticipating that when you give people an inch, most of them are going to take the proverbial mile, and the Church always tried to cut that off at the pass before it could lead to this.

On both the subject of evolution and with regard to NFP, Pope Pius XII "opened the door." It's also the case that Pius XII during his long reign appointed the vast majority of Bishops who would eventually bring us Vatican II, so that's also on him. He really needed to find orthodox, staunch anti-Modernist priests to appoint as bishops and not this gaggle of scoundrels, 90% of whom were open Modernists. He was also the one who set up Bugnini with his liturgical experimentations (John XXIII actually got rid of the guy) and allowed other experimentation like "Mass of the Future". Pius XII also allowed various Ecuмenical conferences. Finally, he failed to condemned the heresies of Cardinal Cushing in the dispute with Fr. Feeney, and that led to a license to undermine and reject EENS and promote religious indifferentism (as Cushing did). Pius XII's was the watershed papacy that led to Vatican II. Oh, yes, lest I forgot, he also failed to consecrate Russia to Our Lady's Immaculate Heart with all the bishops of the world, and I am convinced that such a consecration would have prevented Vatican II. With all this he's responsible for, I would not be surprised if he's still in Purgatory, and will be until the end of time. That is why Pope St. Pius X wept at being elected pope, because he knew the gravity of the responsibility.

There's an interesting story about Pope Pius IX making a similar mistake. There were a couple statements of his in Magisterial docuмents that the enemies of the orthodox went with an tried to use to undermine EENS (the same ones that are routinely quoted ... and misrepresented ... by the anti-Feeneyites today). He was absolutely shocked (and angry) that people were interpreting the teaching that way and he responded with some strong statements reinforcing EENS dogma.

Author Topic: Incredible Discovery (Read 503 times)

Tourmalet

Incredible Discovery

Struthio

Re: Incredible Discovery

Incredulous

Re: Incredible Discovery

Seraphina

Re: Incredible Discovery

Matthew

Re: Incredible Discovery

Incredulous

Re: Incredible Discovery

Ladislaus

Re: Incredible Discovery

Ladislaus

Re: Incredible Discovery

ByzCat3000

Re: Incredible Discovery

Yeti

Re: Incredible Discovery

Ladislaus

Re: Incredible Discovery

ByzCat3000

Re: Incredible Discovery

Ladislaus

Re: Incredible Discovery

Ladislaus

Re: Incredible Discovery