business letters :: essays research papers

The story behind the letter below is that in that respect is this guy 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 ar actual> archaeological finds. This guy really exists and does this in his> spare time. Heres the actual response from the Smithsonian Institution to> one such find. So, the abutting time you are challenged to respond in>writing.....> ____________________________________________________>> Smithsonian Institute> 207 Pennsylvania thoroughfare> Washington, DC 20078>> Dear Mr. Williams>> Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled> "93211-D,layer seven, conterminous to the clothesline post...Hominid skull."> We sustain given this specimen a careful and detailed examination, and> wo to inform you that we disagree with your theory that it> represents conclu sive proof of the presence of proto(prenominal) Man in> Charleston County two million years ago.>> Rather, it appears that what you have found is the division 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 perspective 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 experience to contradiction with your purposes.> However, we do feel that there are a outcome of physical attributes of> the specimen which might have tipped you off to its unexampled 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> identify proto-homonids.>> 3. The dentition patt ern evident on the skull is more consistent with> the public 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 memorial with this> institution, but the evidence seems to weigh rather heavily> against it. Without going into overly 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 dont have teeth.>> It is with feelings tinged with affliction that we must deny your> request to have the specimen carbon-dated.