The story behind the letter below is that there is this nutball in Newport,
RI, named Scott Williams who digs things out of his backyard and sends the
stuff he finds to the Smithsonian Institute, labeling them with scientific
names, insisting that they are actual archaeological finds. This guy
really exists (ergo you got to love him) and does this in his spare
time!
Anyway...here's the actual response from the Smithsonian
Institution.
Bear this in mind next time you think you are challenged
in your duty to respond to a difficult situation in
writing.
____________________________________________________
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. 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 metal
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
[Mother Shiptons Prophecy] [Poetry]
[Guest-Sign] [Guest-View] [Email]