triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Fwd: Smithsonian Letter (long)

To: Triumphs List <triumphs@Autox.Team.Net>
Subject: Fwd: Smithsonian Letter (long)
From: "Carl Musson (EVENTS)" <musson@arts.usf.edu>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 09:42:27 -0500 (EST)
LBC content:  nil except for reference in the last line...  :-)
Thought you might enjoy this.  


later...
/------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| CARL F. MUSSON, Coordinator               INTERNET:musson@arts.usf.edu |
| Tampa, FL           Opinions expressed are mine and not of my employer.|
\    '58 TR3A (TS25264L)  -  http://www.arts.usf.edu/~musson/triumph/    /

---------- Forwarded message ----------

>
>This is supposedly a true story...
>
>>Subject: Fwd: Smithsonian Letter
>
>>------------------------------------------------------
>>Ok, the story behind this is... There's this nutball who digs things out of
>>his back yard and sends the stuff he finds to the Smithsonian Institute,
>>labeling them with scientific names, insisting that they are actual
>>archeological finds. The really weird thing about these letters is that
>>this guy really exists and does this in his spare time!
>>
>>Anyway... here's a letter from the Smithsonian Institute to this man who
>>sent the Institute one of his 'major finds'.
>>=======================================================================
>>Paleoanthropology Division
>>Smithsonian Institute
>>207 Pennsylvania Avenue
>>Washington, DC 20078
>>
>>Dear Sir:
>>
>>Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled "211-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 one of our staff, who has small children, believes to be the
>>"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 it's 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 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's 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 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
>>Curator, Antiquities
>>
>>




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Fwd: Smithsonian Letter (long), Carl Musson (EVENTS) <=