Piltdown Hoax or Piltdown Hex?

I'm reading Robin McKie's Piltdown Man: British Archaeology's Greatest Hoax on the Observer site.

The thing is over thirty people're suspected of the hoax but no one ever seems to suspect another possibility: the real hoaxsters might've been geologist Kenneth Oakley, anatomist Wilfrid Le Gros Clark and anthropologist Joseph Weiner.

You see in 1953 when the hoax was finally exposed everyone breathed a sigh of relief because Piltdown'd been placing a question mark over the emerging paradigm which didn't allow for million year old 'men' existing in Britain.

Which's probably why '53's pronouncement was merely a rehashing of Weidenreich's in '23 which had it Piltdown was merely a modern human cranium 'married' to the jaw of an orangutan with filed-down teeth.

[That rather remarkable thirty year gap before Weidenreich was confirmed alone should tell you all you need to know about just how fallibly mortal scientists can be].

But when Weidenreich first made his claim a different paradigm was emerging.

Since the turn of the Millennium however traces of 700,000 year old people've been turning up in West Sussex which by a rather curious coincidence's right next to East Sussex where Piltdown was found and it turns out all of a sudden Piltdown would've fitted right in with the latest paradigm - if he hadn't been a hoax.

Which's why I'm a tweaky bit suspicious when Robin McKie tells us the reason for the new tests to be done on Piltdown's "to solve a mystery that has baffled researchers for 100 years: the identities of the perpetrators of the world's greatest scientific fraud."

I can't conceive how they might find that out (unless the researchers're forensic scientists a la CSI) but I can conceive how the filing on the teeth might turn out to be ordinary dietary wear and tear, how now Piltdown's face fits again some if not all of his parts might turn out to be real.