Changes

In 1912 primatologist and paleontologist William King Gregory wrote "It has been suspected by some that geologically the skull is not old at all; that they may even represent a deliberate hoax..."  In 1934 Louis S. B. Leakey wrote in "Adam’s Ancestors" that 'Piltdown' was likely not as old as claimed, and was certainly not very interesting, though he stopped short of calling it fraud.

In 1912 primatologist and paleontologist William King Gregory wrote "It has been suspected by some that geologically the skull is not old at all; that they may even represent a deliberate hoax..."  In 1934 Louis S. B. Leakey wrote in "Adam’s Ancestors" that 'Piltdown' was likely not as old as claimed, and was certainly not very interesting, though he stopped short of calling it fraud.

IN 1950 it was shown<ref>[http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_expose/radioactivedating_piltdown.html] by the fluorine method of relative dating that the Piltdown mandible and cranial bones were considerably younger geologically than the Lower and Middle Pleistocene fossils said to have been found at the same site.

IN 1950 it was shown by the fluorine method of relative dating that the Piltdown mandible and cranial bones were considerably younger geologically than the Lower and Middle Pleistocene fossils said to have been found at the same site.<ref>[http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_expose/radioactivedating_piltdown.html]

== External Links ==

== External Links ==