Quote from Forum Archives on February 7, 2000, 8:42 am

Posted by: clean-hewmor <clean-hewmor@...>

The story behind the letter below is that there is this person in
Newport, RI, USA 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 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 thatyou 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