[meteorite-list] Meteorwrongs

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

From: Dean Langadas <dean_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 09:55:45 2004
Message-ID: <004901c19b92$79dde400$d960a4d0_at_4ssn601>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C19B57.CCBEC940
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1256"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all:

Since a few folks on the board have opted to slam an individual for his =
ongoing postings of meteorwrongs, I thought I'd post one of my old =
favorites, how to let a guy down easy. This is a real letter to a real =
guy, and it fits the occasion. Good for a laugh, and some of you guys =
need to take the hint.

=20
There is a gentleman in Newport, VT named Scott Williams who digs things =
out of his back yard and sends them to the Smithsonian Institute, =
labeling them with scientific names, and insisting that they are actual =
archaeological finds. Here is an actual response from the Smithsonian =
Institution.
___________________________________________________

Smithsonian Institute
207 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20078

Dear Mr. Williams:

Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled "93211-D, =
layer seven, next to the clothesline post ... Hominid skull." We have =
given this specimen a careful and detailed examination, and regret to =
inform you that we disagree with your theory that it represents =
conclusive proof of the presence of Early Man in Charleston County two =
million years ago.=20

Rather, it appears that what you have found is the head of a Barbie =
doll, of the variety that one of our staff, who has small children, =
believes to be "Malibu Barbie." It is evident that you have given a =
great deal of thought to the analysis of this specimen, and you may be =
quite certain that those of us who are familiar with your prior work in =
the field were loathe to come to contradiction with your findings. =
However, we do feel that there are a number of physical attributes of =
the specimen which might have tipped you off to its modern origin:

1. The material is molded plastic. Ancient hominid remains are typically =
fossilized bone.
2. The cranial capacity of the specimen is approximately 9 cubic =
centimeters, well below the threshold of even the earliest identified =
proto-homonids.
3. The dentition pattern evident on the skull is more consistent with =
the common domesticated dog than it is with the ravenous man-eating =
Pliocene clams you speculate roamed the wetlands during that time.

This latter finding is certainly one of the most intriguing hypotheses =
you have submitted in your history with this institution, but the =
evidence seems to weigh rather heavily against it. Without going into =
too much detail, let us say that:

A. The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll that a dog has =
chewed on.
B. Clams don't have teeth.

It is with feelings tinged with melancholy that we must deny your =
request to have the specimen carbon-dated. This is partially due to the =
heavy load our lab must bear in its normal operation, and partly due to =
carbon-dating's notorious inaccuracy in fossils of recent geologic =
record. To the best of our knowledge, no Barbie dolls were produced =
prior to 1956 AD, and carbon-dating is likely to produce wildly =
inaccurate results.

Sadly, we must also deny your request that we approach the National =
Science Foundation Phylogeny Department with the concept of assigning =
your specimen the scientific name Australopithecus spiff-arino. =
Speaking personally, I, for one, fought tenaciously for the acceptance =
of your proposed taxonomy, but was ultimately voted down because the =
species name you selected was hyphenated, and didn't really sound like =
it might be Latin.

However, we gladly accept your generous donation of this fascinating =
specimen to the museum. While it is undoubtedly not a Hominid fossil, =
it is, nonetheless, yet another riveting example of the great body of =
work you seem to accumulate here so effortlessly. You should know that =
our Director has reserved a special shelf in his own office for the =
display of the specimens you have previously submitted to the =
Institution, and the entire staff speculates daily on what you will =
happen upon next in your digs at the site you have discovered in your =
Newport back yard.

We eagerly anticipate your trip to our nation's capital that you =
proposed in your last letter, and several of us are pressing the =
Director to pay for it. We are particularly interested in hearing you =
expand on your theories surrounding the trans-positating fillifitation =
of ferrous ions in a structural matrix that makes the excellent juvenile =
Tyrannosaurus Rex femur you recently discovered take on the deceptive =
appearance of a rusty 9-mm Sears Craftsman automotive crescent wrench.

Yours in Science,

Harvey Rowe
Chief Curator- Antiquities

------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C19B57.CCBEC940
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="windows-1256"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1256">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Hi all:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Since a few folks on the board have opted to slam an =

individual for his ongoing postings of meteorwrongs, I thought I'd =
post one=20
of my old favorites, how to let a guy down easy.  This is a real =
letter to=20
a real guy, and it fits the occasion.  Good for a laugh, =
and some=20
of you guys need to take the hint.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 
There is a gentleman in Newport, VT named Scott =
Williams who=20
digs things out of his back yard and sends them to the Smithsonian =
Institute,=20
labeling them with scientific names, and insisting that they are actual=20
archaeological finds. Here is an actual response from the Smithsonian=20
Institution. ___________________________________________________</FONT=
>
 Smithsonian Institute 207 Pennsylvania=20
Avenue Washington, DC 20078
Dear Mr. Williams:
Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, =
labeled=20
"93211-D, layer seven, next to the clothesline post ... Hominid =
skull."  We=20
have given this specimen a careful and detailed examination, and regret =
to=20
inform you that we disagree with your theory that it represents =
conclusive proof=20
of the presence of Early Man in Charleston County two million years ago. =


Rather, it appears that what you have found is the =
head of a=20
Barbie doll, of the variety that one of our staff, who has small =
children,=20
believes to be "Malibu Barbie."  It is evident that you have given =
a great=20
deal of thought to the analysis of this specimen, and you may be quite =
certain=20
that those of us who are familiar with your prior work in the field were =
loathe=20
to come to contradiction with your findings.   However, we do feel =
that=20
there are a number of physical attributes of the specimen which might =
have=20
tipped you off to its modern origin:
1. The material is molded plastic. Ancient hominid =
remains are=20
typically fossilized bone. 2. The cranial capacity of the specimen is =

approximately 9 cubic centimeters, well below the threshold of even the =
earliest=20
identified proto-homonids. 3. The dentition pattern evident on the =
skull is=20
more consistent with the common domesticated dog than it is with the =
ravenous=20
man-eating Pliocene clams you speculate roamed the wetlands during that=20
time.
This latter finding is certainly one of the most =
intriguing=20
hypotheses you have submitted in your history with this institution, but =
the=20
evidence seems to weigh rather heavily against it.  Without going =
into too=20
much detail, let us say that:
A. The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll =
that a dog=20
has chewed on. B. Clams don't have teeth.
It is with feelings tinged with melancholy that we =
must deny=20
your request to have the specimen carbon-dated.  This is partially =
due to=20
the heavy load our lab must bear in its normal operation, and partly due =
to=20
carbon-dating's notorious inaccuracy in fossils of recent geologic =
record. =20
To the best of our knowledge, no Barbie dolls were produced prior to =
1956 AD,=20
and carbon-dating is likely to produce wildly inaccurate =
results.
Sadly, we must also deny your request that we approach =
the=20
National Science Foundation Phylogeny Department with the concept of =
assigning=20
your specimen the scientific name Australopithecus spiff-arino.  =
Speaking=20
personally, I, for one, fought tenaciously for the acceptance of your =
proposed=20
taxonomy, but was ultimately voted down because the species name you =
selected=20
was hyphenated, and didn't really sound like it might be =
Latin.
However, we gladly accept your generous donation of =
this=20
fascinating specimen to the museum.  While it is undoubtedly not a =
Hominid=20
fossil, it is, nonetheless, yet another riveting example of the great =
body of=20
work you seem to accumulate here so effortlessly. You should know that =
our=20
Director has reserved a special shelf in his own office for the display =
of the=20
specimens you have previously submitted to the Institution, and the =
entire staff=20
speculates daily on what you will happen upon next in your digs at the =
site you=20
have discovered in your Newport back yard.
We eagerly anticipate your trip to our nation's =
capital that you=20
proposed in your last letter, and several of us are pressing the =
Director to pay=20
for it.  We are particularly interested in hearing you expand on =
your=20
theories surrounding the trans-positating fillifitation of ferrous ions =
in a=20
structural matrix that makes the excellent juvenile Tyrannosaurus Rex =
femur you=20
recently discovered take on the deceptive appearance of a rusty 9-mm =
Sears=20
Craftsman automotive crescent wrench.
Yours in Science,
Harvey Rowe Chief Curator- Antiquities<FONT=20
face=3DArial></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C19B57.CCBEC940--
Received on Sat 12 Jan 2002 12:56:34 PM PST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Dave Harris: "[meteorite-list] Nininger museum brick?"
Previous message: George N.: "[meteorite-list] Mohamed"
Next in thread: trandall_at_idsi.net: "[meteorite-list] Meteorwrongs"
Reply: trandall_at_idsi.net: "[meteorite-list] Meteorwrongs"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

StumbleUpon

del.icio.us

Yahoo MyWeb