I don't know if this is true or not, but certainly
is interesting...


> > The story behind the letter below is that there is a nutball in Newport,
> > Rhode Island, named Sam Hart, who digs things out of his back yard and
> > sends the stuff he finds to the Smithsonian Institute, labeling them with
> > scientific names and 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 Institute. Bear this in mind the next
> > time you think that you are challenged in your duty to respond to a
> > difficult situation in writing.
> >
> > Smithsonian Institute
> > 207 Pennsylvania Avenue
> > Washington DC 20078
> >
> > Dear Mr Hart
> >
> > Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled ?3211-D,
> > layer seven, next to the clothesline post. Hominid skull?
> >
> > We have given the 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-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
> >
> > 1. The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll that a dog has chewed
> > on
> >
> > 2. Clams don't have teeth
> >
> > It is with feelings tinged with melancholy that we must deny your request
> > to have the specimen carbon dated. That 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 Physiogeny Department with the concept of assigning
> > your specimen the scientific name Australopithicus 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 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 in
> > 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

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *