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.

 

Starchild bump

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

There's nothing to debate his data on. No data, no facts, no case. This one was filed in the "not worth my time" bin for just about everyone a long time ago.




posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: tanka418

There's nothing to debate his data on. No data, no facts, no case. This one was filed in the "not worth my time" bin for just about everyone a long time ago.


If you actually did "file this" in the "not worth my time" bin...you cheated yourself. But that tends to happen when people accept unqualified interpretations of viable data. Perhaps you should get ahold of all the data an actually evaluate it for yourself. You can learn more than enough on-line in a couple of years to actually have a base line expertise in the requisite sciences. You should try it; actually knowing as contrasted with simply believing.



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: TaiHaiChen

Given that I actually believe this is a genuine non human skull rather than as the critics claim a child with hydrocephily and given that I actually also believe in the Genetic data which was shown to have nearly no similaritys except in the section of the DNA called the endrons or junk DNA I believe the following.


It is related to life on earth but it stem's from a branch prior to the Cambrien Explosion (650 million years ago), possibly a previous eco systemic life system which may have existed during or prior to the snow ball earth period of the earth's history (roughly estimated as a period of super ice ages in which the oceans froze even at the equator dating from abour 2.25 billion to 750 million years ago with likely multiple inter glacial period's of warming in which other PREVIOUS cambrien explosions may have occured - lack of fossil evidence is definitely not evidence against this hypothesis).

It may be of related but no longer Terrestrial life, maybe it's ancestor got off the planet or perhaps we came from somewhere else?.

It could be totally alien in origin but have come form a species that has been present in the earths biosphere long enough to have become infected with multiple virus and bacteria altering it's DNA and leaving the Endron's that are so similar to life on earth which it's main genetic sequence is totally different, the cartilage in it's eye's for instance is coded differently to any eye on earth, it's bone structure is thinner, lighter and stronger than our's, more like tooth enamel but with carbon fibre like hairs reinforcing the bone matrix.

It is not a child with hydrocephily and it is not directly related to the human race but rather some other sapient humanoid race.

R.I.P. Loyd pye, they did there best to discredit and blacken you.



He had his life threatened, was terrorised by mysterious threats on the telephone, most genetics labs refused to analyse the skull.

www.lloydpye.com...
www.starchildproject.com...
www.starchildskull.com...

edit on 23-3-2016 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 12:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: LABTECH767
it is not directly related to the human race but rather some other sapient humanoid race.

If you're going to make such a bold, definitive statement, I hope you have something to back it up. All the genetic information shows quite clearly that the skull is human.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

ACTUALLY you are the one making the bold statement, please provide the genetic reference you are calling on to ascert this claim that it is human, hot air being used to discredit truth.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 12:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: LABTECH767
it is not directly related to the human race but rather some other sapient humanoid race.

If you're going to make such a bold, definitive statement, I hope you have something to back it up. All the genetic information shows quite clearly that the skull is human.


Perhaps you could post the data you think says the skull is "human"...As I said, I'd like to see such data, because, I do not believe it exists, except as a misunderstanding...



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 12:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TaiHaiChen

You know I have been on this kick about my kids heads. They have mini bumps like the ones on the lateral sides of the SCS. Less pronounced but the same thing.

It makes me think its just part of a family tree of humans that mixed with others.

They get that from my wife. I have bumps in the back of the skull up top rear.

My kids have all our bumps making me think the both are traits of a common ancestor.

The more I think about it, the less alien it becomes.

edit on 3 24 2016 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

I am posting this here ancientaliensdebunked.com...

....it is a little long but really covers both sides of this and has good explanations



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 01:11 AM
link   
I can't say I have a strong opinion on the subject, but a guy with a blog calling it "debunked" doesn't make it a hoax.
Anyhoo if someone is interested starchild project has a web page with dna results. Not unbiased maybe, but certainly more detailed than what was discussed here so far.
I am really unsure what to think about it. But somehow tend to hope for sthg more in depth than what was presented so far.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 02:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

did you even bother to READ it??? he presented both sides (showed the pro side first and didn't just gloss over it) and and explained each point, why each point did or did not make sense and why...he made MANY points about the dna.

1999 determined to be male...2003 determined to be native american subgroup 3 by 2 different independent tests...claim is made that there is contamination, if so, how can any subsequent tests be accurate??? and this contamination details are not avaiable.

we do not have alien dna to compare this to...so how was the machine calibtrated""" dna determined the mother was female she has xx if the starchild is male where did the y chromosome come from the machine was set for human dna (no alien dna to compare)

so this dna male is set aside because contamination but we are not told how or why, but subsequent samples will be contaminated as well if you go with this theory.

“It is easy to get a BLAST result like they did. All you have to do is enter jibberish. Or, you can set the parameters to something absurd (like demanding a 100% match for a chicken gene while searching the human genome). Or, sometimes the servers are busy and they kick back with the generic statement.” -

There are said to be no frontal sinuses, a condition that affects about ten percent of the population.” -

. Carter also demonstrated that DNA is not even needed to obtain the same results that the Starchild Project did. From there, it doesn’t get any better. The analyses and explorations thereof performed by the Starchild Project demonstrates that they don’t even possess the most basic level of understanding on the topic of genetics. “Their discussion of “shotgun” vs. “primers” is riddled with inaccuracies. In fact, this clearly demonstrates their utter lack of expertise in the field. If they cannot understand the basics of what they are dealing with, we cannot trust them that they are getting the story straight, and we cannot trust their conclusions about ‘Starchild’ genetics.” -


they certainly don't need $7 million to do the complete genome ...does not take a complete genome to prove ancestry...so this raises a big red flag.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: research100

No, when I read the discussion and answered your post wasn't visible yet.
IS THAT A REASON TO YELL FOR YOU?



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: research100
a reply to: tanka418

I am posting this here ancientaliensdebunked.com...

....it is a little long but really covers both sides of this and has good explanations


Yes I've read that...and have requested better interpretation!

Better yet; how about some real data...as opposed to the non-scientific tripe y'all keep posting in your attempts to "debunk" the skull...

I'm really getting tired of y'all insisting that some half-baked journalist (or what ever) with a total fail of an interpretation, and a complete lack of supporting data has anything even close to an acceptable analysis of the real scientific data.

You all have based your understanding on nothing but an insistence that this is nothing more than mundane from a person that has not the skills, nor education to even render an analysis.

Typically, debunkers attempt to use obsolete data, and deliberate misinterpretation and misdirection of the reality in order to support their position.

When, in fact, the data are rather clear; the skull is not Human! (just the mtdna proves this).



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418
Yes I've read that...


Have you really?

Because this "person that has not the skills, nor education to even render an analysis" is citing the analysis of a Dr Robert W. Carter, PhD in Biology.

See alienresistance.org...

Or do you mean that this Dr. Carter doesn't have the skills and the education?



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: tanka418
Yes I've read that...


Have you really?

Because this "person that has not the skills, nor education to even render an analysis" is citing the analysis of a Dr Robert W. Carter, PhD in Biology.

See alienresistance.org...

Or do you mean that this Dr. Carter doesn't have the skills and the education?


Thanks for that, I've not seen it before.

Unfortunately, the good doctor has failed to address even the most rudimentary aspects of this. For instance he said nothing at all about the mtdna and that analysis.

And then of course there is the "creationist" aspect to your biologist...something that doesn't quite make it in a scientific sense...I would expect that to significantly color his analysis, making it virtually worthless.

How about y'all stop with the fringe scientists and get somebody that can actually provide a suitable analysis?

You are trying way too hard to debunk reality...it will never work.

Your analyst would have done better to be something along the lines of a "Micro" biologist, or a Geneticist. And definitely y'all need somebody that won't try to disguise their shortcomings with irrelevant BS!

Try again!...Oh...please address the data next time rather than the failings of some supposed scientist.

edit on 24-3-2016 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   
You guys are right. What was I thinking. We finally have definitive proof of alien life and have answered the age old question of are we alone. Now if only we could find a way to get this earth altering news out. There's gotta be something we can do.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

I bought a scs book a while ago and its very interesting, im no expert on anatomy.
So went to a hospital with it to just ask around after a while i spoke to several professionals and they all where very intrigued.
sure nothing definitive bu they all where of the opinion that a lot of extremely strange medical conditions could be an explanation, and all of them thought it would be as good as impossible to explain it that way.
after hearing the opinions, i asked if they have a religion and all of em same answer, been raised as xxx bu none of em believed in those fairy tales.

so its clear to me that any data or interpretations and especially opinions on this skull produced by "religious believers" is utterly useless!


edit on 24-3-2016 by TheBwaap because: forgot a word



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Has anyone ever attempted to do facial reconstruction on that skull..?

The most recent, and most technologically advanced, reconstruction can be viewed here:
files.abovetopsecret.com...

Harte



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Seems to me the skull is deformed due to genetic abnormalities which are scientifically proven to exist in the Starchild's 100% proven 100% human DNA.

So to recap, both the male and female DNA is human. There is a gene which is proven to be defective in the Starchild DNA which is directly associated with skull deformities.

How this is still a thing is baffling.
edit on 25-3-2016 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Seems to me the skull is deformed due to genetic abnormalities which are scientifically proven to exist in the Starchild's 100% proven 100% human DNA.

So to recap, both the male and female DNA is human. There is a gene which is proven to be defective in the Starchild DNA which is directly associated with skull deformities.

How this is still a thing is baffling.


Sorry man, but your "recap" is faulty.

The DNA has NOT been proven to be Human at all...current data supports this...

However, you are correct; when using old/obsolete data...time for an update!



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
I thought this had been finally debunked. Didn't the Dan analysis end up showing that Starchilds parents were human?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join