[2544] in Humor
fwd
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Yelena Margolin)
Thu Nov 12 16:09:24 1998
To: humor@MIT.EDU
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 15:56:51 EST
From: Yelena Margolin <yelya@MIT.EDU>
>> 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! (I sense a kindred
>>spirit....)
>>
>>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. I'll wager he has an invisible friend too.
>> ___________________________________________________
>> 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 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
