The Piltdown Plot

By Christine Freundlich

People have always been trying to find the "missing link" between animals and humans ever since Charles Darwin proposed the idea of natural selection and evolution.  Thus, it came as no suprise to the supporters of Darwin's theory of evolution when Charles Dawson discovered what appeared to be this "missing link" in a gravel pit (called Piltdown) in Sussex, England.

The story of Piltdown has long been one of the most fascinating episodes of fraud in the history of evolutionary biology.

This story begins in England 1912, where a team of scientists working under lawyer and paleontologist Charles Dawson, found the most bizarre fossils in a gravel pit such as fossilized bits of hippopotamus and elephant teeth. The most suprising find was a skull that appeared fully human but was accompanied by a jaw with a canine tooth that seemed to have belonged to a chimpanzee. Pieces of flint and other primitive tools were also found at the site.

Indeed, this was a very unusual find because the skull seemed remarkably advanced, given the proposed time period it was supposed to have lived, but the jaw seemed very primitive, almost ape-like. However, both of these characteristics supported the prevailing views of human ancestry, namely that humanity was the result of a very ancient lineage, and that the first modern human feature to emerge was the enlarged brain. Dawson concluded that this species must be the missing link between ape and man, living during the Pleocene period. He named this evolutionary linking species Eoanthropus dawsoni and quickly became a world famous overnight sensation.

Because of Dawson’s reputation and the elegant manner in which the skull supported the paradigm of human evolution at that point, few people argued with Dawson’s discovery and his discovery was placed in a paleontology museum. So, for forty years, this very sapient Piltdown Man inhabited a branch of the tree of human evolution, featured in professional articles and books, in newspaper reports, and even in biology textbooks read by high school students. 

During these four decades from 1910 to 1950, some opposition from competitive and somewhat mischievous scientific critics occurred. Sir Arthur Keith speculated that fundamentally the teeth were like those of an ape and that the skull and the jaw could not belong to one and the same creature but little could be done to discredit Dawson.

Then in the year 1953, a new method of checking upon fossil human remains in relation to associated animal bones, by means of fluorine tests, was being developed by Dr. K. Oakley. He soon decided to apply this test to the Piltdown skull and jaw with results that confirmed many suspicions. The fluorine tests revealed that the skull and the jaw were truly contemporary whereas the animal teeth and bones supposedly found with them were of a quite different age. Furthermore, subsequent research began to reveal that humanity evolved quite differently. The human lineage was in fact much younger than anything that could have been found in the Pliocene period. 

Again tests were intensified, and it was then found that the ochrous color of the specimens was due to the presence of paint and coloring materials. Overwhelming evidence began accumulating against Dawson’s work and it had to soon be dismissed.

The final result was that Dawson’s work was considered fraudulent . The biggest tragedy that had resulted from the acceptance of his inaccurate concept that clouded the views of many scientists when it came to their examination and appraisal of other fossil human remains. 

Questions:

1. Why did the scientific community take so long (40 years) to thoroughly investigate and finally disposed of Dawson’s Eoanthropus dawsoni idea?

2. What does this scenario reveal about the nature of the scientific community in regards to new ideas and theories? 

3. Consider the difference between a mistake and fraudulence. Justify why is the latter unacceptable in the scientific community. 

4. Consider the following quote:

"It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." –Sherlock Holmes-

5. Do you believe this to be the attitude towards scientific thought in the Piltdown scenario? Do you think this attitude still exists today? Explain your answer. 



References:

Ashley Montagu. The Piltdown Mandible and Cranium American Journal of Physical Anthropology (1951) 

Henry, Gee (1996). Box of Bones ‘Clincher’ Identity of Piltdown Paleontology Hoaxer. Nature v.381. pg261-262

Millar, Ronald William (1972). The Piltdown Men. London: Gollancz Inc.

Spencer, Frank (1990). Piltdown, A Scientific Forgery. London: Oxford University Press.

Walsh, John Evangelist (1996). Unravelling Piltdown: The Science Fraud pf the Century and It’s Solution. New York: Random House Publishing.

Websites:

Harter, Richard (1997). The Bogus Bones Caper http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/piltdown.html

http//www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/Prefaces&gratitude.html