Language Blog

Language Blog

           I found this experiment VERY difficult for the reason that I'm so use to just saying whatever it is that I want or need. I felt the need to say something while I was trying to only use hand signals to my friends, but I had to stop myself. It was very hard communicating with my friends, especially with the fact that they weren't really able to understand what my hand signals meant. My friends impressions seemed somewhat impatient like they wanted so much to understand what I wanted to say, but couldn't make out my hand signals that easily. Yes, they had to alter their way of communicating by talking a little slower than usually and our conversations were pretty basic and easy going instead of a more intellectual conversation that we would be able to have verbally. If we were from different cultures, I believe the speaking culture would have the better advantage of complex ideas because their able to explain what their trying to say and give better and more understandable explanations. Some attitudes that the speaking culture would have towards the culture that wasn't able to speak would most likely be frustration. It was hard when my friends were trying to understand what I was signing to them so I can imagine the same for them. When someone that can only use American Sign Language is trying to sign to someone who does know sign and can only use language is very difficult and complicated. The person that can speak, doesn't understand what the other is signing which forces them to point at things or just nod their heads trying to make it easier for them to understand. For example; at work I sometimes get customers who sign and Its very hard for me to understand what their asking for since I don't know how to sign. We both end up pointing at things and I find my self trying to sign the easiest things that I can think of. It's very difficult trying to communicate and understand with those who sign since Im not very familiar with sign language.

              I was only able to last about 10 minutes for this assignment! What made it so difficult was the fact that I am so use to hand gestures and I always tend to move my hands while Im speaking. Its a habit that I always do so for me to stop, it was VERY difficult. Especially with that fact that while we speak we also show emotions so not being able to smile or raise eyebrows and having the same tone in voice was always very difficult while speaking to my friends. Its only a natural instinct to show expressions on our face so I feel that that was probably the most difficult while communicating. After awhile my partners found our communication very boring. With no expressions or body motions is was like they were talking to a wall. I think its very important when we use signs in our language because it shows more of a direct point and gives attention when were trying to communicate. Since Im one of the biggest hand gestures and I always have to move my hands while I speak I feel that its a way to express what I'm trying to say in a more vivid way. I think its a natural ability for humans to read body language, but maybe for those who can't see it, such as the blind. Some adaptive benefits to possessing the ability to read body language is easily figuring out how someone is feeling by their movements of body, not necessarily language. You can tell someones emotions by their body language which gives us humans a better understanding of our population.

Piltdown Hoax Blog Post

The Hoax

In 1908, on an archaeological site in England, there was a discovery of bone structures of an apes jaw and a canine tooth that was similar to a humans teeth structure. Although these findings were soon to be labeled as the Piltdown Hoax. It took 40 years before scientist had realized that these bone structures were a forgery. Someone had filed down the teeth of the apes jaw. Charles Dawson claimed that a workman at the Piltdown gravel pit had given him a fragment of the skull four years earlier. With revisiting the site, Dawson found the remaining fragments of the skull with the help of Arthur Smith Woodward who announced that the fragments were very similar to a modern humans skull. The reason for Piltdown taking 40 years before being spotted as a fraud, was because scientist were not able to see the fragments or examine it at all. It was kept secure and locked in the British Museum. The responses that occurred because of this was taken to be proof that science has its skepticism. Although those with a better understanding of nature sees this event as just a wrong turn, but eventually the arrival at the right destination will occur.

The Piltdown forgery demonstrates that even scientist, being human, make mistakes. It shows that scientific knowledge, having theories and facts has its fallibility. Facts are used to help scientist understand and test their theories. It as well isn't in scientist nature to consider someone could ever intend to play some spiteful deception. It also brought rivalry towards England because they wanted to claim that the early man had come from there because they knew with such findings, it would strengthen the fame and recognition.

Some positive aspects because of the Piltdown skull is fossil discoveries that are founded since, show advancements from a small-brained but upright, to the larger-brained upright humans. There was a preconceived view that a mans brains had to be fully developed before other changes could occur in a human structure, it wouldn't have trigger much suspicion today as it did then. What they also discovered was fluorine that seeped into the bone fragments while being buried under ground which helped scientist find an accurate date of the fossils. Because of this event, the scientific process has taken on a more direct route. If another discovery of a fragment is found, one must fit it into a  new theory, re-examine the evidence to find any errors in the discovery. Basically, whatever errors a scientist make, its more likely that it will be discovered by another scientist.

I feel that it is impossible to remove the "human" factor from science because human factor involves the study of all aspects of the way humans relate to the world around them and aiming to 'improve' performance. I wouldn't want to remove the human factor from science because I think that humans feel that it is necessary to diagnose or identity problems and apply a solution. We as humans make mistakes, but it just gives us ways and solutions to help come up with more theories and facts.

A life lesson that I can take from this event is even with a specimen secured in a museum for everyone to see can end up being a forgery. Since scientist weren't able to observe the skull, no one was able to verify its truth. I feel that we need multiple scientist opinions before ones able to agree with their theory. We can't just base the truth on just one persons opinion or observation because even with us being humans, we do make mistakes.