It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Study: Top 5 Characteristics of Real Alien Cone Head Skulls

page: 4
47
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by MerkabaMeditation
 


The information presented here is false.

The DNA tests were not real and hoaxed.

The skulls are normal (plates and all) with reshaping do to ritual and cultural practices.

It is normal for some skulls to have two plates.

The OP is spreading lies either knowingly or unknowingly. But the fact remains, its all hogwash and totally fabricated by hucksters trying to fool gullible people into forgoing research on anatomy of the human skull to sell lies about fictional aliens.

The truth will set you free...from hoaxes.

MM




posted on Apr, 6 2014 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by KanuTruth
 


You don't seem to explain why these cone-headed animals have to be from another planet. I don't really think they have to be from another planet at all. Maybe these things were very smart species but lacked enough common sense or lacked enough cooperative attitude to stay alive and thrive like humans have.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 12:22 AM
link   
I find it much more likely that all of these are examples of artificial cranial deformation, but those which supposedly are "alien" skulls are of increased sophistication in comparison with other examples lacking these particular features that have been pointed out.

Why do I think this is more likely? Well, humans are a creative and innovative species. We build upon earler foundations and advance technology over time as new ideas help improve our knowledge base.
Most likely, the reason why these "alien" cone head skulls are so different from other examples of artificial cranial deformation, or head-binding as it often is referred to if I remember correctly, is precisely because of the two small holes.
They were probably carefully drilled into the skull to release pressure and prohibit fluid build-up during the head-bindings, resulting in a much healthier individual than in other examples and an intact cranial structure despite its increased volume.

Brien Foerster is not an expert. He's just really into pseudo-science.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 12:48 AM
link   

ABeing
the reason why these "alien" cone head skulls are so different from other examples of artificial cranial deformation


What makes you think they are different?


of the two small holes. They were probably carefully drilled into the skull


What makes you think the 2 small holes are special? if you had bothered to actually follow the thread you would have seen

Oriented the same way, on the right, is a modern adult human skull showing that openings for veins called parietal foramina (arrow) are normal variations.



despite its increased volume.


What increased volume are you on about?



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


I was adressing the opening post, and the supposed characteristics of the skulls in question. If it wasn't clear enough, I am arguing that most, if not all except for those genetically deformed, elongated skulls are just examples of head-bindings of varying sophistication and probably technique as well. But, it's pure speculation. What is clear however is that these are not "alien" skulls.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:35 AM
link   
I watched a documentary several years ago about women who would shape their babies heads by adding oil and massaging them. They did this to get a nice round skull and prevent 'flat spots' which many people have as a result of sleeping on their backs when they were infants.

Maybe these skulls have had a similar process? I'd imagine that gradual shaping via massage would not cause much in the way of scarring

very interesting read!



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 


The DNA testing analysis needs to be done by several different independent labs, the test results from one lab alone wont hold.
Common sense tells anyone looking with their own two eyes at pictures of the Alien skulls the cranial size is abnormally large. I don't need a science article to tell me what my perception can reveal is obvious. Nothing you have written is persuasive.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:49 AM
link   
The french skull in the op opening thread is that of an aristocratic woman dating back to the very early dark ages. Source



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 08:17 AM
link   

AthlonSavage
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 


The DNA testing analysis needs to be done by several different independent labs, the test results from one lab alone wont hold.


It was done by two different labs and they both have confirmed the DNA is human, have you even bothered to read what's been posted?

It was tested at BOLD (Bureau of Legal Dentistry), a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia and Trace Genetics, which specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples.



I don't need a science article to tell me what my perception can reveal is obvious. Nothing you have written is persuasive.


Its clear you are not even examining the facts presented , you are just looking for ways to hang on to what you want to believe. So if you cant be "persuaded" by absolute facts then it obvious you wish to live in ignorance.



edit on 7-4-2014 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Riddles
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


The cone-head skulls, particularly those found in Peru, have been the subject of much scientific research and discussion since the Internet first went online.

It has long been known that what makes these skulls such an enigma is the fact that the brain cavities of these skulls is roughly 25% larger than that of a normal human being.

Applying boards to a baby's skull CAN produce the same visual effect, however it DOES NOT increase cranial size!

Hence the mystery...


Want to post a link to that that DOESN'T come from a alien site



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   

PhoenixOD
Did anyone notice these inconsistencies?

First they tell us that aliens skulls have only two plates in the skull (although im sure i can see a very faint jagged slit down the back)


Here they say 2 holes is what proves an alien skull..but if you look it clearly has 3 skull plates which by their own theory means it must be human!


..and the first one with the 2 skull plates doesn't have the alleged tell tail 2 holes either.

Now here they are claiming that flat foreheads are a sign that the skulls must be human.


And then in the very next picture they present what they allege is an alien skull that has a flat forehead which by their own theory means it must be human!




Basically the Ancient aliens website is just looking for any anomaly and claiming that this is proof they 'MUST' be aliens. But none of these proofs are consistent across all of the alleged 'alien' skulls they are presenting.

We are all looking for good solid evidence of alien life guys but you have to keep an eye out for these con men selling snake oil. People have been conning the public with stuff like this for 100's of years now.


edit on 5-4-2014 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)


Correct and again WHY don't they show both skulls from the same position!!!

Easy they are talking



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 


Nice.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by KanuTruth
 


So, please tell me, why are the comparisons not 'like for like', i.e. the evidence of flattening through binding is compared with a skull from a different angle where you cannot tell whether it is flattened or not,; or the number of cranial bones is a clear image compared with an oversaturated image where there is no way to determine if there are sutures or not? Plus this also clearly contradicts the 'two holes' scenario where it is obvious that the longitudinal suture is evident.

I'm not saying I'm not open to the possibility, but I don't like information presented as evidence when it is not a true , clear comparison.
edit on 7-4-2014 by aorAki because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:52 PM
link   

wmd_2008
Correct and again WHY don't they show both skulls from the same position!!!


If they did that it would show that the "alien" skulls were exactly the same as the other ones, and how could they make money then?

Remember, the whole reason to make out that some of the skulls are "alien" is to make money.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 08:19 PM
link   

PhoenixOD
Well it took only a few mins in google to find out some real info about the claims of the so called cone heads alien skulls.

It has been claimed bu the ancient aliens site and the book by Childress that 2 holes in the skull indicate a skull MUST be alien.. But in fact they called parietal emissary foramina and are totally normal and can be seen in normal human skulls.



On the left is a skull from a Paracas grave. Oriented the same way, on the right, is a modern adult human skull showing that openings for veins called parietal foramina (arrow) are normal variations. The sagittal suture is the wavy line between the two parietal bones (2). The frontal bone (the forehead) is labeled 1 and is not included in the Paracan photograph. The occipital bone is labeled 3. Images: Left from Brien Foerster through www.grahamhancock.com; Right from A. R. Freire et al., “Emissary Foramens of the Human Skull: Anatomical Characteristics and its Relations with Clinical Neurosurgery,” International Journal of Morphology 31, no. 1:287–292, dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022013000100045.

source

Its also be claimed that less than 3 skull plates MUST prove a skull is alien when in fact its a condition called sagittal synostosis that is present in some human skulls.



On the left is a skull from a Paracas grave. The sagittal suture appears to be missing. On the right is a modern human skull from a person whose sagittal suture fused prematurely and is obliterated. Images: Left from Brien Foerster through www.grahamhancock.com; Right from A. R. Freire et al., “Emissary Foramens of the Human Skull: Anatomical Characteristics and its Relations with Clinical Neurosurgery,” International Journal of Morphology 31, no. 1:287–292, dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022013000100045.

source


Foerster claims the cranial capacity of these skulls is much too large for a human— “in some cases 2.5 times larger than a conventional modern human skull.”1 He says he’s talked to “a doctor” who assured him the large volume could not be attributed to ritual cranial deformation and must therefore be genetic. In reality, the average cranial capacity of the skulls from the necropolis is about 1600 cc. Normal human cranial capacity varies widely, with 1350 cc being the modern average, Cro-Magnon brain size being about 1600 cc, and Homo erectus being substantially smaller than that of modern humans. While above average for modern humans, this volume is not abnormal for humans.

Foerster notes the skulls have two abnormal holes and “only one parietal plate” instead of the usual two. The latter is known as sagittal synostosis—premature fusion of the sagittal suture line that runs across the top of the skull. This suture knits the parietal bones together, but premature fusion can obliterate the line. The little holes are a common human variation. Called parietal emissary foramina, they allow the passage of veins connecting the venous system inside the skull to that on the outside.

source

Plus we now know that the claims about DNA sited at the end of the op's post are completely unreliable as they have not been produced by a professional laboratory, checked or published. The only DNA test done by professional world class labs who specialize in dealing with ancient DNA analysis prove the DNA to be human.

I don't blame people for being fooled by the ancient aliens site , Brien Foerster or childress's books because they make their living from taking half truths and twisting them into lies about aliens and selling them to the general public. They are good at it as its their job but in reality they are snake oil con men at best.


edit on 6-4-2014 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

Outstanding post!


Thanks for finding this information.....As far as I'm concerned after reviewing this evidence, these skulls must be classified as human.

I'm slightly sad about that TBH, but not entirely surprised.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by KanuTruth
 


The two holes at the back of the head are common in human skulls. It is call the parietal foramen. There are two opening in the parietal bone near the sagittal margin to the rear. The openings are symmetrical and circular in shape, with variable size ranging from a few millimetres to several centimetres wide.



As picture above shows, parietal foramen that is greater than 5 mm may be due to high associations with cortical and venous anomalies. Mutations in the ALX4 and MSX2 genes cause enlarged parietal foramina.


Bermondsey Abbey Photographs (Above)

With regard to the skull sutures it is obvious that the frontal bone is stretched enormously; it is also evident that the sagittal suture begins very high up on the skull on those few photographs from Peru that show this element.





Craniosyntosis occurs when one or more sutures fuses early as seen below.



The most common form is sagittal sysnostosis. Fifty percent of all cases have suppressed growth in the lateral plane of the skull, compensated by a disproportionate growth in length, resulting in a long, narrow skull.

Such as the Paracas skulls have an average capacity of 1600 cm3 and the human range is up to 1800 cm3 and they therefore fall well within the normal distribution range.

An elongated skull is just a status symbol, no anomalies involved. In a lot of cultures, body parts were bound like the feet of Chinese women or altered in one or another way. This is nothing alien to Earth cultures. There is much we are being misled on, intentionally or through ignorance.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 11:06 PM
link   
here are some more

King TUT


King Tut and Peruvian Skulls Comparison


Akhenaten Skull AKA KV55 and His children





Deforming with a board
Ahhh I dont think SO !

Come on Now,, look at the Jaw Bone , Eyes Sockets & Even the Teeth !
and People are Screaming cause by Binding with a board! ?
True, as some may be .. a influence of imitation of who , how or what these skulls Belonged too
its defiantly not like a modern human of any race that i see and it not a natural deformity from a genetic Disease






Nope


Nope


Nope -- Ahh wait.. lets back that up ...

lets see here Big Eye Sockets Check .. Large wide Jawbone Check.. Elongated Skull Nope
ahh kinda like Akhenaten Skull


lets look again



Neanderthal and Modern Man



Ohh Look A Peruvian Paracus Elongated Headed Child
AGE say maybe around 3 to 5 or just 2 years old of the bones


Nice Thick Massive Ribcage for a child


a closer look at the ribcage and big molars ( Teeth ) for a child



anything looking like a Modern Human ( Child ) To You ?
So Much for that Head Binding Theory for this one


I would love to see the Adults Skeletal body Remains yet to be seen

I bet if Shown, Thicker Bones, Thicker Ribcage, Thicker Bone Limbs,
If it is it Would Scream Neanderthal as That is just what Neanderthal Bones Has

leftover link from Early man Neanderthal to modern man that died out 3 thousand years go coexisted with us around the world just maybe .. tho no description at all from the old world 1,000 bc just the Skulls well like the Paracus Skulls






















edit on 7-4-2014 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Wolfenz

Ohh Look A Peruvian Paracus Elongated Headed Child
AGE say maybe around 3 to 5 or just 2 years old of the bones


Do you have a link to the age of the child. Or was it just a wild card guess?


WolfenzNice Thick Massive Ribcage for a child


Looks normal, considering the rib cage is protecting vital organs.


Wolfenza closer look at the ribcage and big molars ( Teeth ) for a child


Teeth look normal to me. At birth people usually have 20 primary (baby) teeth, which often erupt about 6 months of age.




Wolfenzanything looking like a Modern Human ( Child ) To You ?


Yes it does.


WolfenzSo Much for that Head Binding Theory for this one


How do you come to that theory?



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:24 AM
link   
Here are two skulls that are not cone heads, but are among the strangest looking skulls to be found in Peru's museums.

The skull in the first picture was called "Type J", and the second skull pictured was called "Type M."





Lumir G. Janku wrote…


The "J" type of skull presents different sets of problems. It is an equivalent of the modern type of skull in all respects, with only several factors out of proportion. Less significant is the size of eye sockets which are about 15% larger than in modern populations. More significant is the enormity of the cranial vault. The estimated cranial capacity ranges between minimum of 2600 ccm to 3200 ccm.

Again, the age of the specimen is unknown and so far I am not aware of other specimens of this type. The variation on a theme may be the "M" type of skull which is even more bizarre than all the previous skulls.

The "M" type of skull is incomplete, as the lower part of the facial area is concerned. What is apparent from the remnants of the facial portion is that the characteristics are entirely within the range of a normal human skull. The cranial vault, on the other hand, is the largest amongst the displayed specimens. Also, the two protruding "lobes" are highly anomalous. The cranial capacity can be estimated safely above 3000 ccm mark.

Both "J" and "M" types are bordering on biological impossibility. The only explanation I can imagine for the specimens to be naturally born is if the neoteny (the ability of the species to prolong the growth period before maturing) of both groups had been expanded beyond the range for a modern type of human, for the skull to grow to such a size. That may also mean the average life span of these specimens may have been substantially longer than the average for the modern human type.

Any conjectures that what these specimens represent are simply deformations or pathological cases can be hardly substantiated. Anomalous types of growth or shapes appear from time to time in the modern human population, however, these occurrences are still within the range of the given species. The largest skull documented in the medical literature had the cranial capacity of 1980 ccm, however, the shape of the skull was normal. Also, it is necessary to keep in mind that any pathological growth of the cranium has dire consequences for the afflicted individual at the early stage of the development, practically without exception. Nature is very unforgiving in this respect. All the specimens presented here were mature individuals.

The capacity of the cranial vault (and thus the brain mass) and intelligence is not necessarily indicated by the other. The individual with the largest skull, already mentioned above, was a retarded man, while Anatole France with his 1100 ccm was quite a brilliant writer."


Source: www.world-mysteries.com...

If a large, but still "normal" human skull has a cranial capacity of 1980 ccm. and the skull J was estimated between 2600-3200 ccm and the M type estimated above 3000 ccm then CLEARLY we must conclude that the above two skulls cannot possibly be the result of cradle-boarding!

I will not join in with the crowd saying that they are "aliens" because as far as I know, that is NOT what the above RELIABLE study had concluded. The above study simply concludes that the beings belonging to these skulls appear NOT to be related to anatomically modern humans.

They may represent an earlier branch of hominid species that died out, or they may represent a species that was genetically manipulated into being and died out.

And personally, from the looks of those skulls I'm very relieved that those species are not around any longer!

edit on 9-4-2014 by Riddles because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   

KanuTruth

#2 Alien Cone Head Skulls Don’t Have Cranial Scarring
The practice of artificial cranial deformation involved wrapping the head of babies with wooden boards or twine. The presence of this persistent pressure causes swelling, bulging and permanent scarring on the subjects. Real alien cone head skulls don’t have scarring since it is believed their DNA naturally causes the shape of their head. I propose the theory people deformed children to resemble the elite ruling class of true aliens present in these civilizations at the time.

Why are these comparing 2 skulls at totally different profile angles? Where is the scar (being flat doesn't = a scar)?


#3 Alien Cone Head Skulls Have 25% More Cranial Volume
The cranial volume of these skulls is more than 25% larger than human skull volume. That means the brains of these subjects were also 25% larger than human brains. Normal human skulls from the Inca time period have 1100-1200 cm3 of cranial volume. Cranial deformed skulls from the Inca time period, although somewhat elongated in shape, have the same cranial volume as a non-deformed human skull. The true alien cone head skulls have 1500 cm3 volume (significantly more than a human.)

-Human skulls sometimes have greater cranial volume, too.
-the "alien" pic sticks out further than the "normal" profile at the top, but leaves more open space at the bottom.


#4 Alien Cone Head Skulls Have 2 Small Holes In The Top Of The Head
This method is, perhaps, the easiest and fastest way to distinguish between a human and proposed alien skull. True alien cone head skulls have two small holes in the top of the head. Medical researchers have no explanation for this oddity. Human skulls simply don’t have these holes. The only holes similar to this in a human skull appear in our brow line. Nerves that control muscle movement in our face and forehead extend through 2 holes similar to these holes. Did these aliens have elaborate muscles in the top of their heads? Or, were they used for other purposes unknown to us?

-this part really shows the lack of research done in this area: medical research DOES have an explanation, humans DO have these holes, the only similar holes AREN'T just on the brow line, and the holes aren't where muscles attach so why speculate that aliens have exotic muscles in the top of the head?

-isn't the pic there showing the holes on either side of cranial plates that aliens aren't even supposed to have?



#5 Alien Cone Head Skulls Have Only 2 Cranial Plates
The human skull has 3 major bones (plates) that comprise the spherical shape of the skull. They are the frontal bone, the parietal bones (left and right hemispheres). (I’m leaving out all the other smaller bones in this comparison). The main difference in cone head skulls is the ones believed to be truly alien in origin have only two major skull bones. Still others have four skull bones. In both cases, this differs from human skulls. This difference cannot be attributed to cranial deformation. Wrapping the skull at infancy to change its shape cannot change the genetic makeup of human skull bones. Again, this is a natural occurrence as directed by the being’s DNA.

leaving aside the fact that humans CAN have 2 plates, the pic chosen shows us a view where we can't tell if the skull has 2 or 3 plates.



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join