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.
originally posted by: CIAGypsy
originally posted by: tanka418
originally posted by: CIAGypsy
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: buddha
I wish the fool had done the DNA tests in secret.
He did, where is the report?
My point exactly. There's no information on exactly WHO did the alleged testing. Furthermore, there's no corroboration by other independent labs to show similar results. This guy has an agenda that goes something like this - $$$$$
Actually that wouldn't be his responsibility...and, even IF he did provide this additional data, it could not be considered valid simply because the original data provider provided it...I do hope you understand how that works.
My biggest issue is the total lack of any data whatsoever...
I understand the process better than most because I *DO* research... Or rather, I own companies who do research. If I or one of my scientists comes across something groundbreaking, it must be independently corroborated. There have been too many cases where research was not independently backed up and investors lost tons of money after it was discovered the 'research' was bogus.
Any scientist worth their salt would get REPEATABLE, independent verification of any finds worth scientific value.
originally posted by: Harte
An analogy: When a murdered body is discovered and the victim is known, is it necessary to conduct a DNA test to determine whether or not the deceased is human and therefore the perpetrator guilty of homocide?
Or can the medical profession identify a human by examination without the need for a DNA test?
Examination of a skeleton results in more than the conclusion "it's a humanoid."
Lastly, there is no reason whatsoever to exclude head binding as the cause of any elongated skull ever found. Claims of elongation beyond the capability of head binding that are made by Foerster (or Pye) can be (and have been - by me) shown to be utter nonsense.
Harte
First, consider the source: the preliminary results of genetic testing were announced by Brien Foerster, who is the assistant director of the Paracas History Museum.
That’s a pretty impressive title, and I’ll admit that it threw me. That title implies formal archaeological, curatorial, or history credentials, maybe a body of peer-reviewed research projects. That title implies that he has serious academic credibility, and that we should listen to his announcements about his areas of expertise.
None of this is true. Some pretty basic Google research turns up some facts about Foerster that cast his announcement in an entirely different light.
First, his academic credentials: by cobbling information together from the webpage of his company Hidden Inca Tours and his official Facebook page, it appears that he has a Bachelor of Science from the University of Victoria, in British Columbia, Canada. Foerster doesn’t offer any further information about his educational background, including his exact field of undergraduate study. I was unable to find any evidence of an advanced degree.
Foerster’s company, Hidden Inca Tours, is a travel agency that specializes in taking travelers on paranormal tours around the world, but focuses on Peru and the surrounding region. Foerster has also written a number of books on archaeology, including one called “The Enigma of Cranial Deformation: Elongated Skulls of the Ancients,” which he wrote with David Hatcher Childress. Vanderbilt University archaeologist Charles E. Orser once called Childress “one of the most flagrant violators of basic archaeological reasoning.”
originally posted by: DAVID64
First of all, it's Brian Forester.
He would never reveal the name of the person he claimed he was doing the testing. then when he does reveal the name, that person says he's lying. then, he changes his story again and says he is working with that person, they're just not working on this particular project, which is what he has been claiming all along. He and other hoaxers like Pye have been pulling this for years to rake in money and sell books.
originally posted by: CIAGypsy
Nothing about the way these alleged DNA tests were done is Standard Scientific Method. Nor was it peer reviewed and independently corroborated.
You will have to excuse me, I'm not a large fan of the "peer review", especially where anything extraterrestrial is concerned.
Lastly, there is no reason whatsoever to exclude head binding as the cause of any elongated skull ever found. Claims of elongation beyond the capability of head binding that are made by Foerster (or Pye) can be (and have been - by me) shown to be utter nonsense.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanka418
You will have to excuse me, I'm not a large fan of the "peer review", especially where anything extraterrestrial is concerned.
Fair enough. Peer review does not necessarily validate anything but it should, at least, confirm that valid experimental protocols are observed.
What's your alternative? Other than just accepting any old claim at face value, that is.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanka418
You will have to excuse me, I'm not a large fan of the "peer review", especially where anything extraterrestrial is concerned.
Fair enough. Peer review does not necessarily validate anything but it should, at least, confirm that valid experimental protocols are observed.
What's your alternative? Other than just accepting any old claim at face value, that is.
originally posted by: tanka418
Oh I don't know Phage, how about evaluating the protocols and procedures used by who ever to determine IF they were indeed proper and acceptable.
perhaps going on to see if the results are what they are claimed
So...while the peer review should give me all the "proof" needed, I don't really need that peer review to determine the truth and reality...
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanka418
So...while the peer review should give me all the "proof" needed, I don't really need that peer review to determine the truth and reality...
So...
No alternative.
You just accept any old claim, just because. That's nice.
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: tanka418
Oh I don't know Phage, how about evaluating the protocols and procedures used by who ever to determine IF they were indeed proper and acceptable.
Please list the "protocols and procedures they used.
perhaps going on to see if the results are what they are claimed
Please show us the results....
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanka418
I asked for an alternative to peer review. You offered none.
So do you just reject any old claims, just because?
Sorry, I seem to have missed that. You did speak of "knowledge of our peers" but that did not seem to have much to do with the dissemination of information, more of a building on prior work. That's good. That's fine. But it doesn't really help with separating wheat from chaff when it comes to claims.
Yes, and I related to you a process that is currently being used with great success that doesn't depend on "peer review" and has provided all of the science, and technology you use in your everyday life, and in fact take for granted.
originally posted by: wmd_2008
originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
One of my favorite subjects...
Made miserable, with people's inability to suspend disbelief for just one thread, and talk about the impossibilities/possibilities/probabilities.
Screw it. I'm out.
S&F for you MRuss. The Paracas Skulls are one of my fascinations. I'm not surprised we are finding more and more new humanoid species, the deeper archaeologists dig.
CdT
Sorry CdT but the motto of this site is DENY IGNORANCE