Radiometric dating on sedimentary rocks
So, some caution might be in order before even long established theories are accepted as the "gospel truth", especially when some of the most famous scientists in the field start to question their own life's work.
In considering the theory of human evolution it is interesting to note that some very well known scientists have actually suggested that the line of human evolution is far from clear.
But why shouldn't the Piltdown Man hoax be discussed?
The success of the Piltdown Man hoax gives us an interesting look into human nature.
However, the whole thing turned out to be an elaborate hoax.
The skull was indeed human (about 500 years old) but the jaw was that of a modern ape whose teeth had been filed to look like human wear.
For example, in 1990, Richard Leakey himself said that, "If pressed about man's ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that all we have is a huge question mark.
To the embarrassment of many a very intelligent man and woman of science, overly confident conclusions and arrogant statements have been made based on such similarities that have, on occasion, turned out to be not only wrong, but painfully wrong.The success of this hoax for almost 40 years is pretty impressive.However, had the original bones been available for study, this hoax would probably not have continued for as long as it did.So obviously, the point of including the Piltdown Man hoax in this discussion is to show that even scientists are, or at least have been, capable and possibly even willing to overlook something if it matches their preconceived ideas.
(Back to Top) was discovered in 1922 in the Pliocene deposits of Nebraska by Mr.Of course, the argument is that many scientists of the day did not think too much of Piltdown Man since many did not think that the cranium and the jaw were from the same creature.