Radiometric dating of human fossils
Until we secure more of the dentition, or parts of the skull or of the skeleton, we cannot be certain whether However, even if Osborn made some foolish statements about Nebraska Man, the claim is that most other scientists of the day did not even think that the Nebraska Man tooth was from a primate at all.In fact, the tooth was generally dismissed and had a negligible effect on the scientific thinking of the day.It was not until 38 years after the bones had been "found" that the hoax was exposed.
There was an attempt to use this tooth at the Scopes "monkey" trial in 1925 as evidence of the animal ancestry of man.Three months before her death, she said in an interview, "All these trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that's a lot of nonsense." Biases are of course part of human nature. Dawson found a mandible and a small piece of a skull in a gravel pit near Piltdown England.The jawbone was ape-like but the teeth had human characteristics. These two specimens were combined to form dawn man, which was supposedly 500,000 years old.Taking isolated similarities by themselves, the theory of evolution appears to be quite reasonable... However, it seems that too much weight has been placed on similarities without questioning the differences.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.