Re: virus: Be a Darwin in your own backyard!

B. Lane Robertson (metaphy@hotmail.com)
Tue, 14 Jul 1998 08:58:33 PDT


Sounds like whoever wrote the letter ALSO needs a
life (as well as the staff who speculate on such
finds and wager on what might happen next).

More concerned with Tim's reason for introducing the
post with a reference to me. Making allowances for
differing senses of humor, I still fail to see how
adding my name to this message contributed to its
importance (except in the obvious).

No, I have no relatives in RI.

Brett
<>
>Brett, do you have a brother in Rhode Island by
any chance?
>
>-Prof. Tim
>-----Forwarded Message-----
>
>Date: Thursday, July 09, 1998 1:11 PM
>Subject: This guy needs a life!
>
>
>>>>The story behind the letter below is that there
is this nutball in
>>>>Newport, Rhode Island 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!
>>>>Here is the 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 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 what you have found is the
head of a Barbie doll,
>>>>of the variety one of our staff, who has small
children, believes to
>>>>be "Malibu Barbie".
>>>>It is evident 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 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-hominids.
>>>>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
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 the carbon-dating is likely to produce
wildly inaccurate
>>results.
>>>>
>>>>Sadly, we must also deny your request we
approach the National
>>>>Science Foundation Phylogeny Department with the
concept of assigning
>>your
>>>>specimen with 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 accpet 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 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 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
>>9mm
>>>>Sears Craftsman automotive crescent wrench.
>>>>
>>>>Yours in Science,
>>>>
>>>>Harvey Rowe
>>>>Chief Curator-Antiquities

B. Lane Robertson
Indiana, USA
http://www.window.to/mindrec
Bio: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
See who's chatting about this topic:
http://www.talkcity.com/chat.cgi?room=MindRec

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com