Ah, the rigors of research!
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 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 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