DIY Archaeology

The story behind the letter below is that there is this person 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.

____________________________________________________
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 a 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 yourtheories
    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