The Starchild Skull

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Agartha

They refuse to say what they entered in or let anyone else analyze it and enter it.

Exactly, because it's all a lot of rubbish.. and it is making them rich!

I've said it before - it is morally wrong to allow a fool to keep his money.

originally posted by: tanka418

She is a D V M: a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine.

And, I do believe that would be sufficient qualification for the job of geneticist, depending of course on any extra course work she may have done.

My son is going to attend vet tech school after he graduates next year.

You want I should ask him if the Starchild Skull is an Alien Hybrid? Knowing him he'll say yes, so I know you'll take his word as gospel.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: TerryDon79
One thing I did notice while reading everything, he actually agreed that the skull was a boy. Now a female human produces the xx chromosome. The male the xy. For him to conclude it was a boy must surely mean he concludes the father is a human as that is the only place we have been able to find the Y chromosome. Unless aliens have found a way to breed with humans or splice genetically. If that's the case then we won't learn the answer until we have alien DNA to compare the skull with.

All male mammals have "Y" DNA. Birds and insects have an equivalent.

I see.

So the starchild is a human-opossum hybrid.

Harte

Someone should alert Ketchum... looks like they're building another Bigfoot.

a reply to: draknoir2

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: tanka418
there are 2011 results.

What lab performed the 2011 tests?
Please show us the full 2011 lab report.

If you cannot that indicates you are just making crap up.

Unlike the crew around here; I don't make crap up.

And,

Your request for the lab and it's report will not be forthcoming. Not so much because the data does not (in your opinion) exist, but more because you are all hypocrites, and because of your hypocrisy you have disqualified yourselves.

Seriously, in one thread you have done more to harm the credibility of every skeptic on this site...and all so that your little egos can remain somewhat in tact.

When / IF y'all want to actually discuss and perhaps learn, y'all let me know...I'm always ready for real science and learning...you should be too, is a shame you desire to remain ignorant.

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: tanka418
there are 2011 results.

What lab performed the 2011 tests?
Please show us the full 2011 lab report.

If you cannot that indicates you are just making crap up.

Unlike the crew around here; I don't make crap up.

And,

Your request for the lab and it's report will not be forthcoming. Not so much because the data does not (in your opinion) exist, but more because you are all hypocrites, and because of your hypocrisy you have disqualified yourselves.

Seriously, in one thread you have done more to harm the credibility of every skeptic on this site...and all so that your little egos can remain somewhat in tact.

When / IF y'all want to actually discuss and perhaps learn, y'all let me know...I'm always ready for real science and learning...you should be too, is a shame you desire to remain ignorant.

No lab name or test results because you want to discuss real science? Show us both of these pieces of information so we can have a fully informed debate.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: tanka418
there are 2011 results.

What lab performed the 2011 tests?
Please show us the full 2011 lab report.

If you cannot that indicates you are just making crap up.

Unlike the crew around here; I don't make crap up.

And,

Your request for the lab and it's report will not be forthcoming. Not so much because the data does not (in your opinion) exist, but more because you are all hypocrites, and because of your hypocrisy you have disqualified yourselves.

Seriously, in one thread you have done more to harm the credibility of every skeptic on this site...and all so that your little egos can remain somewhat in tact.

When / IF y'all want to actually discuss and perhaps learn, y'all let me know...I'm always ready for real science and learning...you should be too, is a shame you desire to remain ignorant.

No lab name or test results because you want to discuss real science? Show us both of these pieces of information so we can have a fully informed debate.

Yes well that's the thing isn't it...you don't want an "informed debate" you want it your way...so...perhaps after you have managed to lose the hypocrisy, and actually meet this question on a level playing field, we can resume...until then you have no credibility. And I have no desire to argue with a group that uses different rules to suit the situation.

If you want data...look on the starchild site...

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: tanka418
there are 2011 results.

What lab performed the 2011 tests?
Please show us the full 2011 lab report.

If you cannot that indicates you are just making crap up.

Unlike the crew around here; I don't make crap up.

And,

Your request for the lab and it's report will not be forthcoming. Not so much because the data does not (in your opinion) exist, but more because you are all hypocrites, and because of your hypocrisy you have disqualified yourselves.

Seriously, in one thread you have done more to harm the credibility of every skeptic on this site...and all so that your little egos can remain somewhat in tact.

When / IF y'all want to actually discuss and perhaps learn, y'all let me know...I'm always ready for real science and learning...you should be too, is a shame you desire to remain ignorant.

No lab name or test results because you want to discuss real science? Show us both of these pieces of information so we can have a fully informed debate.

Yes well that's the thing isn't it...you don't want an "informed debate" you want it your way...so...perhaps after you have managed to lose the hypocrisy, and actually meet this question on a level playing field, we can resume...until then you have no credibility. And I have no desire to argue with a group that uses different rules to suit the situation.

If you want data...look on the starchild site...

We can't use the Starchild site as it is biased and doesn't have factual data. It uses more assumptions than anything else.

It would be like using realufos.net to have a discussion about ufos. The site is heavily biased towards ufos and hoaxes.

The Starchild site is highly biased towards it being an alien skull.

The only places there is no bias is scientific data. Which was given in 1999 and 2003. If it was indeed an alien skull then surely the scientist would have jumped at the chance to publish it to be correct as it would through a whole lot of evidence into something people can only theorise about. Yet both test (1999 and 2003) say it isn't alien or alien-hybrid.

The same people who have done the 1999 and 2003 tests didn't do it for financial gain. Mr Pye has as can be seen on his website.

originally posted by: tanka418

Unlike the crew around here; I don't make crap up.

When are "y'all" gonna tell us more about those Pleiadian humans?

originally posted by: TerryDon79
We can't use the Starchild site as it is biased and doesn't have factual data. It uses more assumptions than anything else.

It would be like using realufos.net to have a discussion about ufos. The site is heavily biased towards ufos and hoaxes.

The Starchild site is highly biased towards it being an alien skull.

Looks like you have a problem. course then again, you have no data that the starchild site's data is anything but accurate, even if incomplete.

The only places there is no bias is scientific data. Which was given in 1999 and 2003. If it was indeed an alien skull then surely the scientist would have jumped at the chance to publish it to be correct as it would through a whole lot of evidence into something people can only theorise about. Yet both test (1999 and 2003) say it isn't alien or alien-hybrid.

The same people who have done the 1999 and 2003 tests didn't do it for financial gain. Mr Pye has as can be seen on his website.

You don't know how that works do you?!

The scientist you refer to was a "consultant" who entered into a "work for hire" arrangement with Pye. What that did was "force" a non-disclosure condition on the whole of the work. Meaning; Mr. Scientist had no rights to the work he was producing. ALL OF THE RIGHTS t that work belong to Pye, and it is Pye, and only Pye that can make decisions on that data.

IF the scientist had released any of that information , he would be risking his company, and future...and, violations of copyright law can get a bit nasty (5+ years in Federal Prison)...

So you can either drop the whole discussion based on insufficient data, or, you can use what's available. IF you choose to not use available data; then there is nothing to discuss...

Oh, and if you want to discuss "bias", we have several right here that exhibit far more bias than anything Lloyd Pye can muster!

In fact, the bias exhibited here should serve to partially discredit the responsible skeptics on ATS.

ETA: Have you ever looked p the word "alien" in a dictionary? Did you notice that this skull "fits" that definition rather well?

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

Unlike the crew around here; I don't make crap up.

When are "y'all" gonna tell us more about those Pleiadian humans?

when you stop embracing ignorance!

a reply to: tanka418

Fact. Lloyd Pye's livelihood depends on keeping the Starchild=Alien belief alive. Fact. Pye does not have a background in any scientific field let alone genetics. Fact. All the results on the Starchild site are written by Pye. Even if the first fact weren't true Pye would still be an untrustworthy source. He doesn't have the background to provide an educated analysis of the data. For example I remember one test where part of the DNA could not be identified. Pye took this to mean it was alien. He didn't mention the far more likely explanation. The sample provided was degraded. This is why the actual lab reports are required. So people who have actually studied genetics can provide an educated analysis on the results.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: tanka418

Fact. Lloyd Pye's livelihood depends on keeping the Starchild=Alien belief alive.

Just as your livelihood depends on something being kept alive...like mine; I depend on the necessity of software.

ETA: Probability strongly suggests that this Starchild Project of Lloyd Pye's was a "money pit", and required nearly all of his resources...as opposed to "his livelihood"...he undoubtedly had a "day job".

Fact. Pye does not have a background in any scientific field let alone genetics.

Tell me, when you started your career, how much of a "background" did you have? And, did not that background increase with time? Youre assumption is incorrect...Lloyd Pye had something over 15 years experience in genetics.

Fact. All the results on the Starchild site are written by Pye. Even if the first fact weren't true Pye would still be an untrustworthy source. He doesn't have the background to provide an educated analysis of the data.

Actually, Pye didn't write any of the results, those were obtained from an automated machine designed to analyze DNA. The interpretation is all his, but, again, an interpretation is based on something; in this case valid DNA reports.
And, for someone who "doesn't have the background to provide an educated analysis" he sure did a reasonable job. He demonstrates an fair grasp of genetics, and DNA analysis...which is more than can be said those pseudo-skeptics around here.

So...here...why don't you try to use Pye's data to prove him wrong...it seems to me that IF you are correct, and Pye is wrong, you shouldn't have much difficulty...but, then again, nobody else around here can do that! It seems that IF the current available data is used, the only outcome is "non-human".

originally posted by: tanka418
ALL OF THE RIGHTS t that work belong to Pye, and it is Pye, and only Pye that can make decisions on that data.

And this is the problem: Forester keeps the skull hidden and won't let any independent party to analyze it. If it was a real alien it would have been the discovery of the century, and he would have become the most famous man on this planet. Instead, he keeps it under key in his little private museum: this speaks volumes!

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: tanka418
ALL OF THE RIGHTS t that work belong to Pye, and it is Pye, and only Pye that can make decisions on that data.

And this is the problem: Forester keeps the skull hidden and won't let any independent party to analyze it. If it was a real alien it would have been the discovery of the century, and he would have become the most famous man on this planet. Instead, he keeps it under key in his little private museum: this speaks volumes!

Well now, you know of an independent party that wants to analyze the skull? I'd bet, that IF an independent approached with the "right deal" (enough money) they could gain access to the skull.

And, again; you are misusing the word "alien"...it is possible for something to be quite "alien" an hold no other interest than a novelty. Alien does not mean it is from "off-world", regardless what you want to ascribe.

I'd say, at best, what the skull represents is an unknown species of humanoid, no longer extant on Earth. And I think Pye did a remarkable job of proving just that...an unknown species now extinct...

But, it seems that all of y'all have issue with that...but, that's your problem...

a reply to: tanka418

Like I said, Pye's livelihood depends on the Starchild skull. As such how can we be certain he is providing us all the data? How do we know he isn't cherry picking data to fit his narrative? We already know he had omitted facts because it doesn't fit his story. Just see my example above. If Pye is so certain of the authenticity of this skull why is he so afraid to provide the actual lab reports. Why does he only present data that had been filtered through him.

You said at the start of your post that everyone makes a living from something. I make my living from making beer. What if I told you that drinking my beer would make you live forever and even provided some data that showed my beer could provide some health benefits. Would you believe me implicitly? Or would you suspect that I was simply trying to up sell my product? Pye is doing the exact same thing. He is making an extraordinary claim and then only shows you the data that supports his claim, albeit marginally.

originally posted by: tanka418

Well now, you know of an independent party that wants to analyze the skull? I'd bet, that IF an independent approached with the "right deal" (enough money) they could gain access to the skull.

There have been a few over the years but all you have to do is read the comments on the starchildproject site and you'll find a few doctors/specialists who have offered to examine the skull but hey have never received a reply from Forester.

And, again; you are misusing the word "alien"...it is possible for something to be quite "alien" an hold no other interest than a novelty. Alien does not mean it is from "off-world", regardless what you want to ascribe.

I'd say, at best, what the skull represents is an unknown species of humanoid, no longer extant on Earth. And I think Pye did a remarkable job of proving just that...an unknown species now extinct...

But, it seems that all of y'all have issue with that...but, that's your problem...

Pye specifically said 'alien from another planet' in his book.
You specifically mentioned aliens from the Pleiades at the beginning of this thread.
We have always said it was a human child.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: tanka418

Like I said, Pye's livelihood depends on the Starchild skull. As such how can we be certain he is providing us all the data? How do we know he isn't cherry picking data to fit his narrative? We already know he had omitted facts because it doesn't fit his story. Just see my example above. If Pye is so certain of the authenticity of this skull why is he so afraid to provide the actual lab reports. Why does he only present data that had been filtered through him.

You said at the start of your post that everyone makes a living from something. I make my living from making beer. What if I told you that drinking my beer would make you live forever and even provided some data that showed my beer could provide some health benefits. Would you believe me implicitly? Or would you suspect that I was simply trying to up sell my product? Pye is doing the exact same thing. He is making an extraordinary claim and then only shows you the data that supports his claim, albeit marginally.

And ,as I noted; the probability is that the skull is a "money pit" and requires more resources than Pye has...thus theskull isn't his livelihood, but more along the lines of his passion, a thing he wants to know more about, and he thinks is important to the history of Human kind. DNA testing still is an expensive task, especially if One is working with an unknown species.

About your Beer...IF it is as god as many imported Mexican Beers...I probably wouldn't question it, as I wouldn't care, and would probably drink it anyway. And I wouldn't "suspect" you of up selling...I would expect it...just as I do with Pye's data. But, I have read his reports, and know some about the test he did, how they are done, and what to expect by way of results...

What I'm seeing out of most here is a refusal to look at the data and evaluate it. And then of course an "out of hand" denial of the data's validity...which is seriously funny because some of his data is "self-validating" (the fact that a certain class of result is returned, proves that the correct methods and materials were employed).

If Pye is so certain of the authenticity of this skull why is he so afraid to provide the actual lab reports. Why does he only present data that had been filtered through him.

Perhaps it is a form of "intellectual property rights control", and, you would probably be very disappointed and equally as angered if he released all the data in an "unfiltered" way...you would find that there is much more irrelevant data there than there is "useful".

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: tanka418

Fact. Lloyd Pye's livelihood depends on keeping the Starchild=Alien belief alive.

Not anymore.

It's only 900 years old, surely there would be ways to DNA test it.

People's been able to DNA test fossil records dating back as far as thousands of years.

You're telling me that something as far as 900 years cannot be DNA tested? Absolutely no organic material present? Turned to minerals completely already?