Is this an alien skeleton? Bizarre egg-shaped skull unearthed from 4,000 years ago

a reply to: dr1234

Is it?

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Frocharocha



I wonder if they've looked at the skull's plate sutures to see if they're all there...I know in some of the elongated skulls that are claimed to be of alien origin (or a different species of hominid), there are less plates to the skull.



But my biggest question that I don't think will ever be answered is this--why? Why have ancient cultures, all over the world, done such a seemingly pointless thing to their children's skulls? It makes no sense to me, unless it really is to emulate a different race of being that they revered and wanted to emulate.



Does anyone have a good answer to the "why" question?

I still can't answer the 'why' question, but you may be onto something considering the idea that ancients may have wished to emulate a different race. The skull on the skeleton shown by the OP looks similar to some of those found associated with megalithic sites on the island of Malta.

www.ancient-origins.net...

Wierd skulls in both places ... megalithic structures in both places. Coincidence? What say you? Is this the race that Homo sapiens may have tried to emulate by skull binding?

a reply to: Fowlerstoad

Oops ... when I stated this: "Is this the race that Homo sapiens may have tried to emulate by skull binding?"

On second thought ... I should have said this instead: "Is this the race that the rest of Homo sapiens may have tried to emulate by skull binding?" After more consideration, I realize that these odd shaped skull people may still also have been a race of Homo sapiens, but then again maybe not. That question is unsettled to me.

originally posted by: Fowlerstoad
a reply to: Fowlerstoad

Oops ... when I stated this: "Is this the race that Homo sapiens may have tried to emulate by skull binding?"

On second thought ... I should have said this instead: "Is this the race that the rest of Homo sapiens may have tried to emulate by skull binding?" After more consideration, I realize that these odd shaped skull people may still also have been a race of Homo sapiens, but then again maybe not. That question is unsettled to me.

I see someone is having similar thoughts to myself. Although, mine involve the possibility of another species in the Homo genus itself, rather than just another race of Homo sapiens. We must all recall that there were other species of humans that we were competing with back in the day.

I wonder.....

Why does head binding have to be the result of emulating anything?

Harte

We must all recall that there were other species of humans that we were competing with back in the day.

I wonder.....

Those species all died out around 30,000 years ago, all the coneheads date from known recent Holocene civilisations. As you should know, a human population will not support a different species, they either get killed or outbred very rapidly.

We already know how this effect was achieved by binding the infants head, a homo sapiens infant

originally posted by: Harte
Why does head binding have to be the result of emulating anything?

Harte

It doesn't--but answering the "why" behind doing something that seems utterly pointless and, with the limited knowledge the ancients had, possibly dangerous to their children becomes increasingly difficult without considering the emulation angle.

Do you have a better answer than emulation of some type? If you do, I'm sure most of us would consider the possibility, but then again, that's all the emulation hypothesis is--a possibility. But when you consider that there have been elongated skulls found that differ quite impressively in size and structure (the lack of certain cranial sutures, for one) at least lend a sprinkle of credence to the possibility that skulls like this aren't all a result of head binding, which leads to the possibility of emulation, assuming the non-bound elongated skulls came first.

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Maybe skull binding makes the brain work differently. We know that much of our brain is unused, maybe squashing it together unlocks neural pathways that we don't usually use.

Okay, that's my out of the box thought of the day.

Just for you, the ten percent brain myth

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Marduk

For the majority of the cases, sure, but there are those examples that show zero evidence of the binding process and show evidence if differing size and cranial structure. Those are worth considering as non-bound, possibly non-HSS skulls.

Just for consideration, of course. But if it weren't that it's such a controversial topic (a cone-head race of humans on earth), scientists would have taken the reality of the skulls that I described above and considered it decent evidence of a different species. But alas, the topic is relegated to discussions of fringe topics because no one wants to take them seriously, which I think is a disservice to the history of the world as a whole.

assuming the non-bound elongated skulls came first.

The first in recorded history date from 700BCE and were mentioned by Hesiod and were known head binders

The skulls found in Malta have not been scientifically dated. They are usually accorded to 3000 bce only because the construction they were found in dates from that period. They were created by tying boards to the head as can be seen from the flattened front. But they were far too well preserved to be that ancient. These skulls are the ones that the claims they had different sutures come from. There is no evidence for this as they only exist in photographs and were never examined by anyone qualified to make statements about them

The Mangenetu African tribe were still practicing head binding into the 1950s
afritorial.com...

The Mangenetu, value intelligence above all things, so the head binding was an attempt to make themselves look more intelligent as this made a bride more valuable.

I think its kind of obvious that all of these binding practices were related to intelligence. Or at least, the apparent simulation of it...

This is not a controversial topic, all of the DNA tests done came back homo sapiens. Its only controversial if you want to believe fringe theory which isn't working with any of the real facts

DNA results Paracas skulls
www.peruthisweek.com...

The Paracas skulls are officially the oldest found at circa 1000BCE

a reply to: Marduk

Why did you link to a hit piece about Brien Foerster and imply that this spoke about the Paracas skull being human DNA? I like to the other story that the author wrote:

The International Business Times reports that the geneticist who performed the tests has chosen to remain anonymous for the time being, but reportedly told Foerster “It had mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) with mutations unknown in any human, primate, or animal known so far. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans.”

The geneticist also said “I am not sure it will even fit into the known evolutionary tree.”

I'm not saying this is proof of the elongated skulls coming from a non-human race, and his announcement does raise more questions than provide answers, but the point is that there is still a possibility that what we're looking at, at least with some of the skulls, is that they don't fit into the mold assumed by most archaeologists..."assumed by" being the relevant phrase.

Plus, I'd like to know which skull they're discussing, because I do know that they have a few with fused cranial plates (without the suture between the plates) and then some that are obviously shaped by binding.

I'm in no way arguing that many do not bind heads for this or that known reason (at least contemporarily), but I still hold the belief that it's such an odd thing to do, and it has seemingly happened all over the world, that it's nearly too coincidental for my flavor. But maybe it is, but I just know that life generally teaches that not many things are a true coincidence.

a reply to: Marduk

Did they all really? I seem to recall speculations that some, like the Neanderthal, hung on just a little longer than originally thought before completely dying out. And honestly, even though these bound skulls are from modern epochs, that doesn't begin to answer where this practice started or even how long it was going on. Could some cultures have been doing it for longer periods, further back in prehistory, where their remains have all crumbled to dust? As I said before, it strikes me as peculiar that the practice was so widespread over disparate civilizations separated by miles of ocean in several cases. Was it done while many humans were still migrating and settling across the world, and carried into later civilizations? What is the source?

How about this answer for why: Because in those days, you being different was cause to worship you as a God. Imagine you're one of those ancient peoples in a tribe. One day you're just kind of chillin' at the river, bull#ting with your homies whiled you fished. For hundreds of years, all you knew was yourself and the tribes around you. That was normal in your world. Then suddenly persons with strange skull features walks up to you and says, "bow before me you puny maggot, and start building my statue" What are you going to do?

Even today tribes exist out in the middle of nowhere that have been contacted by the rest of us, treat us like Gods because they don't know no better. Why did people bind their heads? It was about being different, just like every other ritual people do to deform their bodies. I'm sure in some cases, it was about power. Egypt comes to mind....

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Marduk

Why did you link to a hit piece about Brien Foerster and imply that this spoke about the Paracas skull being human DNA? I like to the other story that the author wrote:

Yup my mistake, I was reading up on a lot of links and inadvertently posted the wrong one for info
let me correct that with this link
martinjclemens.com...

originally posted by: Frocharocha
Now that is interesting. I personaly belive on the rope explanation.

Source

A skeleton which has been found on a site known as Russia's Stonehenge has sparked fresh ideas about extra terrestrial visitor to earth.

The elongated skull shaped slightly like an egg on an otherwise humanoid form has brought garnered enthusiasm from UFO watchers rushed who insist it's proof that aliens had once visited Earth.

Archaeologists, however, have insisted that the skeleton, which belonged to a female from a 4,000 BC settlement, had a perfectly reasonable explanation for the skull which looks elongated.

They state that the tribe which had lived in Arkaim near the modern-day city of Chelyabinsk in central Russia used to bind the head to make it grow out of shape.

UFO watchers have countered with the claim that if this was the case, it was simply a way of mimicking the skulls of the alien visitors, offering proof of visitation.

What is not in doubt is that the skull was significantly elongated and, according to the experts, belonged to a woman who was in the tribe that was part of what is now modern day Ukraine.

Researcher Maria Makurova has confirmed to the Russian news agency TASS: "We have found a well preserved skeleton.

"I would not exclude the possibility that the skeleton belongs to a woman from the Sarmati trible that lived in the territories of what is now modern day Ukraine, Kazakhstan and southern Russia.

"Her skull was elongated because the tribe did so by tying up the heads of their children with rope. It was clearly a tradition in the tribe."

She declined to comment on speculation it was attributed to alien visitors saying that currently they were still working on theories as to why the tribe had the tradition but had nothing fixed yet as a reason.

Only thing i can see is, elongated skulls due to rope tend to have a narrower part right above the eyes, where the rope was placed. This seems to be a particular sign of that technic, but in this case the skull about the eyes or eyebrows is wider and looks very natural, as if it was formed like that to begin with.

Here's a google search for elongated skulls, look at them, clearly there's a difference here.

Elongated skulls

a reply to: Marduk

Thanks for updating me with the new link.

Yeah, I always get my hopes up on things like this, but always want to wait for released studies and peer reviews or "second opinions," of which we'll probably get neither.

The thing that I disagree with in that new link you provided is that they skulls, other than their shapes, are identical to humans', and they are, save a for a few that apparently show no tell-tale signs of skull binding and also are missing some of the cranial sutures that exist on all human skulls.

But even your link does beg the question as to "why" do this--it mentions that "they" think it was to emulate the look of their deities. Okay...why did their deities look like this? If there isn't a chance they were non-human (and there's always that chance since we don't "know," in the definitive sense), then why were their skulls shapes like this, and who's to say that the ones that apparently are missing cranial sutures and are larger than normal skulls aren't actual skulls from said "deities?"

99.9% of elongated skulls are easily provable to be human. It's that 0.01% that intrigues me and leaves us with unanswered questions.

*rolls eyes* if everything is the carbon copy of a human skeleton in all respects, except the head, seems pretty clear it's a human. At best it could be some kind of hybrid. But full on alien, not very plausible at all.

a reply to: Puppylove

Hmmm

at best it could be some kind of hybrid

So your comment doesn't mean anything at all? it could be white but then it could be black!

I realize this could be offensive for some people, i'm not even in the US so i don't have that particular mind perverted stuff about "races" so take my words as they are, a white and a black color, opposite of visual color, nothing else. So hard to express these days with all the retarded pc stuff in the US. Always even giving a ridiculous turn to clearly not race related words. But never mind!