Walsh’s (2010) article on The Skull of Doom is rooted in a fact-finding and forensic mission that revolves around a perceived misleading and/or contradiction surrounding the authenticity of some Crystal Skulls. Through scientific applications that blend robust techniques to generate reliable data, thus base inference from the information thereof. The research results differ on various grounds with the then-existing accounts held on the crystal skulls, especially those that were fronted by Mitchell-Hedges. Mitchell-Hedges argue that his crystal skulls had a pre-Columbian origin. In a series of scientific forensics and tailor-made answers to unresolved issues, Walsh challenges existing explanations.
First the accounts surrounding the origin of the Crystal Skulls as claimed by Mitchell-Hedges. On this point, Walsh questions the contradiction emerging from narratives by Mitchell-Hedges and his adopted daughter on where and when origins of the crystal skulls. Walsh dismisses both accounts with factual explanations as to why the accounts could be misleading. Based on research findings after critical examination of one of the Mitchell-Hedges crystal skulls, she cast doubt on whether it is even genuine. The analysis involves casting replicas of elements and then examining them under powerful electron microscope. Walsh cements her argument by further reviewing through write-ups, communications and correspondence among other archival and museum materials related to these skulls. Explanation made based on the record accounts rather give a different story of where the crystal skulls possessed by Mitchell-Hedges could have originated. Inferences from the analysis results dispute the theory that the crystal skulls are Maya made but cast out using ultra-modern diamond tools through a high-speed process.
The Crystal Skulls could have chronologically first appeared in London. Probably the skulls might have appeared in 1933 after which years later Mitchell-Hedges could have then purchased them. Further archival findings by Walsh tend to disagree with Mitchell-Hedges’ daughter account. Walsh forensic exploration using modern scientific research approaches to unearth the truth and present facts against long-held mythical believes provides leeway for scientists to examine some of what in the past held as intellectually unquestionable. However, with due regards to capacities humankind is also limited. Although, Walsh’s research revolves around ethics but also the fact that the application of scientific techniques in the process is a realization of how robust it is. Science unraveled the molecular composition and artificial casting of Crystal Skulls. Throughout Walsh’s research explanations, examination and analysis; she has consistently been pragmatic rather than hypothetical in approaching and challenging existing information accounts. Such scientific efforts and capacities can be used in discovering the artifacts left behind by past generations of humankind. Indeed, knowledge of past events has informed modern humanity on how to discern and unravel certain issues. Such information enriches the museum archives. Her work is a valuable addition to the dating capabilities of sound scientific research work.
Evolutionary science has been able to use this avenue to further some of the most important theories in humankind. Archeological biologists have long used carbon dating to establish the age of fossils. On this account, Walsh was able to piece information of varied nature and from different sources and combine this with the results of artifact analysis. Through this, she was able to put forward a robust argument about misleading details about the crystal skulls. Currently, evolutionary science is under scrutiny by the debates as to whether it has significantly happened, it is still happening or it will ever happen. Surely, biologists are up on the task to clarify their accounts. Since the renaissance times of Charles Darwin it has been quite evident that evolution is gradual and at times very slow. Thus, how natural selection may take place among species can be elusive to an anxious eye that expects immediate unscientific explanation and easy discovery.
Initial evolutionary works that led to publications by Charles Darwin involved a series of new scientific input and analysis; skeptics took their earliest opportunity to quickly discount him without clearly understanding him. However, this challenge has pushed the evolutionists to new heights scientific in a quest to defend their works. New scientific explanations and tools are daily emerging to especially, seal gaps that form the basis of contemporary debates among proponents and opponents of evolution. This also means that scientists ought to be categorical and ready to justify and defend accounts resulting from their research works. Whether or not to agree with emerging scientific discoveries squarely depends as well on personal superiority complex but this should not form the basis of undermining the research efforts of the biologists involved. Every scientist and their works should be allowed room for expression however, due diligence should be applied while questioning their efforts. The fact that science has a leeway of future improvement of already existing research work is an added advantage for those scientists within the discipline to make it imperative so as dispel unnecessary doubts on rather authentic research work. Contemporary scientists are finding themselves in a situation where they can justify theirs through a combination of several techniques that may crosscut disciplinary fields. This is proving to be rather working on their side, as in the case of Walsh’s forensic works.
Moreover, dubious mythologies should be discouraged and distanced away from mainstream scientific developments as these may tarnish existing and future of any research realization. Innovative communication media is proving to be handy in fast-tracking research developments especially in sharing experiences among peer researchers. Remote scientists are cooperating and sharing research skills, knowledge and resources in an accelerated manner than before. This explains the dynamic nature of discoveries of today’s scientific world vis-à-vis the days of the renaissance. Arguably, functional debates among the scientific elites have aided to foster a healthy environment for research work.
In the wake of Walsh’s developments, it is evident that through experimental designs and hypothesis testing on predictable phenomena that scientific ethics will triumph. Evolutionary scientists continue to use this avenue to clear air on long-standing misunderstandings and misconceptions that linger around this area of specialization. Inevitably, evolutionary scientists should not expect overnight results to such issues but rather prolonged and enduring road to success. As much as it is to mend the ensuing divisions in the public arena about the justification of evolutionary science that should not form the primary impetus of propelling research to the next level but rather should be necessity driven with clear cut intentions that will show how it will contribute to the humanity or sustain dignity of life. That is why some evolutionary scientific explanation to some phenomena remains a mystery without outright or easy answers as to what they imply. However, Walsh’s effort is a clear indication with time it is achievable.
Work Cited
Walsh, Jane. The Skull of Doom. 2010. Web.