Another "Starchild" Skull found in Peru

Hey guys, apologies for the drive-by thread but I haven't got much time right now.
That said, it's come to my attention that another skull seemingly identical to the notorious Starchild skull has been found, this time in Peru.



Lloyd Pye would be pleased and I hope this skull gets ample testing done.

Very curious as to what the members of ATS have to say on this one.

a reply to: ThinkingCap

Looks like another human skull with the same part broken off.

The first skull was tested for DNA three times: the first test proved the child was a male, Pye disagreed and said the sample had been contaminated. The second test, in 2003, proved the skull belonged to Haplogroup C which is Native American. Pye disagreed and then said the father must have been 'alien'. That doesn't make sense as the Y chromosome is only inherited from the father and the child was proved to be a boy....hence his dad must have been human too.

Deformities in newborn are still common nowadays. Head binding was commonly practiced in the Andes.

My personal opinion: another baby born with deformities.

Another poor baby born with hydrocephalus.

like this one
i.dailymail.co.uk...

Here's a comparison of the two.

Starchild


New skull

Best bet is that this is a genetic deformity.

Makes a big difference when the face and jaw are missing.



And tilting the skull back adds to the "desired" effect.

a reply to: draknoir2
Not to approve the "starchild"...er...theory...? I'm sure it's a baby born with deformities, and I agree with you that communications, dramatic photos etc... leaning towards the alien idea are made on purpose.

But on your image, the right skull is made of twice the right half of the left skull, one being pasted symetrically on the left. And the starchild photos are a real entire skull. Not sure your image really supports your views?

originally posted by: blindIo
a reply to: draknoir2
Not to approve the "starchild"...er...theory...? I'm sure it's a baby born with deformities, and I agree with you that communications, dramatic photos etc... leaning towards the alien idea are made on purpose.

But on your image, the right skull is made of twice the right half of the left skull, one being pasted symetrically on the left. And the starchild photos are a real entire skull. Not sure your image really supports your views?

Yes, I removed the jaw and cheek for the purpose of demonstration. That's what a human skull looks like with those parts missing. The original photo is at the left... I thought that was obvious.

Both of the "starchild" skulls have those parts missing, and if you look at the photo of the Pye skull you will see it's presented tilted back, making it appear more "alien". The bottom most orifice is actually where the spine meets the skull.

Here's an example from an unrelated science blog discussing human vs. Neandertal anatomy [human in blue]:

a reply to: ThinkingCap

a reply to: ThinkingCap

I have had encounters just this last two years, with the space beings we call them darklings with the long heads and the pitch black and can blend into the dark and disappear in a blink of an eye read more on my wall. Sounds crazy, but very true. Mshuggers1

a reply to: mshuggers1

You should make a thread about your experiences.

I hope they do testing on this new scull. I too think that it is a human deformity, but who knows?

a reply to: ThinkingCapIn Google Earth go to Puma Punka just west of Lake Titicaca. Go south 7.7 miles and you will see hidden in the mountains a 25 ft bean shaped green florescent object floating under a rock. (16*40'06.45 S. 68*43'22.07 W.) It shows a shadow underneath and causes the shadow on the surrounding snow of the rock above to lighten as compared to surrounding rocks. See for yourself. This leaves out swamp gas, Venus and a giant Chinese lantern LOL