a letter from the Smithsonian (fwd)

[Will Ritchie]

Okay, way off subject, but I don't care.  You'll wonder if this is
actual correspondence.  Don't know.  It claimed to be.  Having met some of
the strange people behind the scenes at the National Museum, I wouldn't be
surprised.
					Morric
	       			<morric at bitsmart.com>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>*****************************************************************
>>
>>  Paleoanthropology Division
>>  Smithsonian Institute
>>  207 Pennsylvania Avenue
>>  Washington, DC 20078
>>
>>  Dear Sir:
>>
>>  Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled
>>  "211-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
>>  one of our staff, who has small children, believes to be the
>>  "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 it's 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:
>>
>>            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's
>>  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 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
>>                           Curator, Antiquities





-- 
Melissa.  ska Ly. Riona Seosamhin bean Morric, vka Emma Eudocia, 
gka M. cope123 at freenet.tlh.fl.us --- GOGD5$ZZ2$ TAnFeYyu PPe!
B/23Bk"2 cNRs8 V3s M4p1 Z** C6 a23+ n7 b54 H173 g5T??8?A mEa4 at Z6 w5
v3R r6?E p32745Zz D56/7~!* h5 sF9)6(SrNn k7BMsW N??95CN)H( HzSp5 LusFL4