Forbidden Archeology_ The Full Unabridged Edition - Michael A. Cremo [233]
5.2.4 Boule on the Toxodon Femur with Arrowhead
Now that we have considered Romero’s objections to Carlos Ameghino’s discoveries, let us turn our attention to a rare mid-twentieth-century review of the toxodon femur with the projectile point embedded in it. In the 1957 posthumous edition of Fossil Men, revised by H. V. Vallois, Marcellin Boule said that after the original discovery of the toxodon femur, Carlos Ameghino found in the Chapadmalalan at Miramar an intact section of a toxodon’s vertebral column, in which two stone projectile points were embedded. Boule stated: “These discoveries were disputed. Reliable geologists affirmed that the objects came from the upper beds, which formed the site of a paradero or ancient Indian settlement, and that they were found today in the Tertiary bed only as a consequence of disturbances and resortings which that bed had suffered” (Boule and Vallois
1957, p. 492). Here Boule footnoted as a reference only the 1918 report by Romero! Boule did not mention the commission of four highly qualified geologists who reached a conclusion exactly opposite that of Romero, perhaps because they were, in his opinion, not “reliable.” However, having closely studied Romero’s geological conclusions, particularly in light of those of Bailey Willis and modern researchers, we are mystified that Romero should be characterized as “reliable.”
Boule added: “The archaeological data support this conclusion, for the same Tertiary bed yielded dressed and polished stones, bolas and boladeras, identical with those used as missiles by the Indians” (Boule and Vallois 1957, p. 492). Boule said that Eric Boman, an “excellent enthnographer,” had documented these facts.
Could human beings have lived continuously in Argentina since the Tertiary and not changed their technology? Why not, especially if, as certified by a commission of geologists (Section 5.2.1), implements were found in situ in beds of Pliocene antiquity? The fact that these implements were identical to those used by more recent inhabitants of the same region poses no barrier to acceptance of their Tertiary age. Modern tribal people in various parts of the world fashion stone implements indistinguishable from those recognized as having been manufactured
2 million years ago. We should also point out that in 1921 a fully human fossil jaw was found in the Chapadmalalan at Miramar (Section 6.2.5).
In his statements about the Miramar finds, Boule provides a classic case of prejudice and preconception masquerading as scientific objectivity. In Boule’s book, all evidence for a human presence in the Tertiary formations of Argentina was dismissed on theoretical grounds and by ignoring crucial observations reported by competent scientists who happened to hold forbidden views. For example, Boule said nothing at all about the above-mentioned discovery of a human jaw in the Chapadmalalan at Miramar. We should thus be extremely careful in accepting the statements one finds in famous textbooks as the final word in paleoanthropology.
It is common to find scientists who disagree with certain controversial evidence taking the same approach as Boule. One mentions an exceptional discovery, one states that it was disputed for some time, and then one cites an authority (such as Romero) who supposedly conclusively settled the matter, once and for all. But we have found that when one takes the time to dig up the report that, like Romero’s, supposedly delivered the coup de grace, it often fails to make a convincing case.
5.2.5 Boman, the Excellent Ethnographer
What was true of Romero’s report is also true of Boman’s. Boule, we have seen, advertised Boman as an “excellent ethnographer.” But in examining Boman’s report, the reason for Boule’s favorable judgement becomes apparent. Throughout his paper, which attacked Florentino Ameghino’s theories and Carlos Ameghino’s discoveries at Miramar, Boman, taking the role of a dutiful