Are these the skulls of ancient 'gods'

Originally posted by Shai
referring to my initally posted link..if you will all check out fig C2 and Figure C3, you will note that they are not the same skull but two different skulls which both dislpay that signature curve 1/3rd of the way down from the crown.

In all the skull deformity sites there are no two identical deformities, and none where the head shapes in to a cone..and I have looked at dozens of sites.
if someone can show me a perfectly smooth skull of the same proportions..just one which is a match or near match to these photos in any medical journal I sure would be curious, and gratified to be enlightened and forever disabused of my foolish notions.

Sincerely
-Shai

Yeah and what about the big round one and the heart shaped one? LOL! How would they produce those effects? I think those are not human skulls.

I think the topics image looks like a gorillas skull to me , jaw is to thick for human.
But if you want to see something totally not human i saved these images below...


www.geocities.com...
Bigger image here here


www.geocities.com...
look at the eye sockets see that bone ring we dont have those...

www.geocities.com...

There was a sixth toe but its hard to see said report.
Ill dig for the article it was in brazil.




[edit on 24-1-2005 by lizzardsamok]

Originally posted by mpeake
Could it be that the practice of skull binding resulted in ancient man attempting to mimmic the beings to whom these skulls belonged to?

Also, here is a good link for some very uncommon skull disorders that have been recently documented. Nothing as drastic as the skulls being mentioned here, but drastic none the less. Which means we can never throw out the possibility that this is just a freak of nature at best.

www.ppsca.com...




The first pictures(s) show the skull before, the next ones, show the result after surgery.

You showed me yours..here's mine:

www.world-mysteries.com...

You can't honestly be saying your photos expalin my skulls....and I surely don't beieve you are trying to tell me that the three skulls identical to this are the result of a known pathology or birth defect..right?
because on virtually every page of the deformities site..including the one you sent me..it is stated clearly that cranial defects affect the face..the jaw, the eye-line or some other feature making life [chewing, eating, speaking, etc.] exceedingly difficult for the victim.
Do you see facial abnormalities here? Then these are NOT deformed skulls of some ancient Incans..these are 'normal' skulls in that the domes do not correspond to any deformity but the skulls correspond to each other perfectly.
Not normal human or proto-human skulls..but normal other-than-human skulls.
And what candidates do we have as owners..other great apes? NO..there were/are no great apes in S.America..not even in the fossil record..Period.

Now if it defies all conventional and accepted 'explanations' it must be that our explanations are wrong and we should be prepared to accept new ones.
Yes?

So why is positing that these are the fossil remains of a super race, possibly an other than earthly race so implausible to some of you?

I leave with a last question..and no further comment until someone of some wit and intelligence, and God-willing..some scientific fiied of releevant expertise cares to join this discussion:

What would it take to convince you of the heretofore impossible?
Who would you have to hear it from before you would believe it?
Why would you resist the evidence in front of you?

www.world-mysteries.com...


-Shai

Originally posted by lizzardsamok
I think the topics image looks like a gorillas skull to me , jaw is to thick for human.
But if you want to see something totally not human i saved these images below...


www.geocities.com...
Bigger image here here


www.geocities.com...
look at the eye sockets see that bone ring we dont have those...

www.geocities.com...

There was a sixth toe but its hard to see said report.
Ill dig for the article it was in brazil.




[edit on 24-1-2005 by lizzardsamok]

Um...i don't really know where to start with this one..other than to thank you for submitting interesting photos..two of abnormalities and one I will leave in the 'jury's out' column.
Now then..about the gorilla skull concept..wherever do you get that idea, and why is everyone repeating it? Haave you actually seen a gorilla skull..and do any gorillas anywhwere have a similar crown and dome to the photos of the peruvian skulls?
If you are going to make a blanket assertion the least you could do is provide a gorilla skull for comparison. My guess is, that like me you wnet to sites all about gorillas and the fossil record and could not find an example that even comes close...and no doubt you were informed, as I was..that even if they were of the gorilla/great-ape family they couldn't possibly have come from S.America where they were found, but would have to have been imprted to the region..since gorillas and great apes don't live there and never did.
Your argument says nothing to alleviate the problem of cranial capacity..which in these skulls is not only 3 times larger than that of us humans but 7-10 times bigger than ape craniums.

Lastly, although your specimens were interesting, no two were alike..whereas I have 3 pristine examples of the very same 'deformity'meaning we are not talking a random genetic misfire..a 'one-of'as my brit friends would say.
'We are talking about three identicals meaning there wqas a certain degree of breeding going on..Get it?

I honestly despair of finding more than a handful of critically thinking N.Americans on this website...where did the bright minds, the curious, the disciplined thinkers of old...have they all gone off to play X-box and Nintendo?

-Sincerely
-Shai

Dear group,

With the posting of this I hope to get rid of any and all assumptions about the skulls being 'gorilla skulls'.
THIS is what a gorilla skull looks like:

www.talkorigins.org...

And this is the side view:

www.talkorigins.org...

So no more shots in the dark..ok?

-Thankijg you in advance
-Sincerely
-Shai

You can't honestly be saying your photos expalin my skulls....and I surely don't beieve you are trying to tell me that the three skulls identical to this are the result of a known pathology or birth defect..right?

Shai-

Go back a read what I posted. I, in fact, did say that these skulls are not as drastic of abnormalities as the ones you provided. But that they are drastic deforms none the less. My point being is that deformalities happen and they can happen in many different ways to the skull. So, one can never dismiss the idea that the skulls you provided are nothing but freaks of nature. There are several other alien like skull deformalities that look even more bizzare than these skulls. Hell, we've even seen cases where humans had horns growing out of their skulls. Now these were nothing more than agitated warts encircled with scar tissue which spiral out from the host's skull, but some would say it was a demon, refusing to accept a more scientific explaination.

So, what I'm saying is, just because we have found a skull that we can't explain doesn't mean there isn't a logical scientific explaination out there, just that we don't have one yet. I tend to shoot for the scientific reason before I jump on the "ancient god bandwagon".

Now, if you read on you would see that I also gave into the theory that they may not be freaks of nature by suggestion that the act of skull binding was a result of ancient mans attempts to mimic the actual owners of these bizzare skulls. If ancient man did view these beings as gods, then it might make sense that they would attempt to transform their owns skulls to match those of the gods they worshipped so that they would be as gods themselves.


[edit on 24-1-2005 by mpeake]

Sorry to prove everyone wrong but all they are, are the skulls of Marge Simpsons ancestors.

Great thread!! I want to say that the oblong skulls are due to binding, but I concede that skull binding does explain the "star-child" skull. But in this site it offers an explanation:

www.world-mysteries.com...

In truth, a unique combination of extraordinary pathological disorders is a possible explanation for the many aberrations evident in the child's skull.

The bottom line is that even though the skull's highly unusual characteristics demand an open-minded approach to it, mainstream science will reject it outright until forced by DNA evidence to do otherwise. Indeed, it could turn out to be nothing more than a butt-ugly kid with an extraordinary combination of cranial deformities never seen before. But it could also have been the result of a human-alien union, or an outright alien with no connection to humanity at all.

I hesitate to call them "gods," but I think this is fascinating and I want to check out all your links!

P.S.-what's wrong with radiocarbon dating?

Have these skulls been carbon dated ???

How likely is it that all by themselves our ancestors got it into their heads that skull-binding would be a neat idea? To what end, to what purpose would it serve them to go through the pain and the risk..to achieve status?
How would a coned head be seen as a status symbol, do you think?

how did a tribe decide that putting a disc in their lip to stretch it out and then pierce it, was desirable?

how did a tribe decide that stretching a neck by increasing necklaces, was desirable?

primitive peoples have done some WEIRD ass things to "enhance" themselves. Does the previous also mean that aliens have big droopy lips and really long necks?

could be something to it all...look at akhenhatens and nefertiti statutes, etc.
www.crystalinks.com...
(scroll to the bottom and look at the black and white pic. of a statue of nefertiti...even in old age the long head is portrayed)

Originally posted by mpeake
Hell, we've even seen cases where humans had horns growing out of their skulls. Now these were nothing more than agitated warts encircled with scar tissue which spiral out from the host's skull, but some would say it was a demon, refusing to accept a more scientific explaination.
[edit on 24-1-2005 by mpeake]

Yes, I've heard of those. Just warts huh? Yeah right. Make up any excuse to not face the facts of what we are dealing with.

chai says, in attempting to negate the explanation of "skull binding":

"The problem with this theory is that the inside of the cranium of the mentioned skulls, although elongated and with a back sloping, flattened forehead, have the same capacity as normal human skulls..."

What's the problem with that? If the binding begins when the sutures have not closed and the fontanels are still there, the brain will continue to grow. As a matter of fact, I believe (although I'm not a pediatrician) that the skull is still capable of being shaped to some extent until the person is approaching puberty, at which point the cranial capacity is within the statistical norm of an adult.

Besides, what really is more far-fetched -- people practicing skull binding for purposes of beauty (or whatever) -- or a race of conehead gods?

Meanwhile, relax! Our young one will prepare mass quantities of food and drink for you to consume!

Originally posted by Leading Lady

Originally posted by mpeake
Hell, we've even seen cases where humans had horns growing out of their skulls. Now these were nothing more than agitated warts encircled with scar tissue which spiral out from the host's skull, but some would say it was a demon, refusing to accept a more scientific explaination.
[edit on 24-1-2005 by mpeake]

Yes, I've heard of those. Just warts huh? Yeah right.

Make up any excuse to not face the facts of what we are dealing with.

Well, I honestly don't care if you believe that the horns were warts or not. I assume you probably think the horns were from a demon though, huh? Sorry, but once again, science has already provided the answere.

Now as far as your comment about me not wanting to face facts, again, you're wrong. In fact, I have provided possible scenerios that support the skulls are, in fact, of alien origin and that the practice of skullbinding is a result of ancient man's attempt to mimic the skull's owners. But, I have not come to any definite conclusion, nor can anyone make any firm decision one way or another regarding these skulls. Not enough is known to make a conclusive statement as to the abnormalities cause.

[edit on 24-1-2005 by mpeake]

I haven't read all the responses, but I will say this. These skulls have been debunked...but in all honesty..... no one for knows sure if they are from binding....to my knowledge it hasn't been proven that are from binding, it has been "assumed" they are form binding. ....Who knows?

AAAAHHHH!!! ALIENS!!!

Sorry, couldn't help it .

Anyhow, on a more serious note, those pictures have been debunked already, I believe. If not, it looks as if it was photoshopped.

However, we can't rule out the possibility of aliens though. It DOES match a lot of the alien sighting descriptions (mainly the long oval head).

[edit on 1-2-2005 by Blackout]

Originally posted by LadyV

I haven't read all the responses, but I will say this. These skulls have been debunked...but in all honesty..... no one for knows sure if they are from binding....to my knowledge it hasn't been proven that are from binding, it has been "assumed" they are form binding. ....Who knows?

Dear Lady V,

I looked for sites which debunked these skulls with no luck. Could you help me out?
The site below I know is a bit cheesy but I post it because it shows, besides the Peruvian skulls, the egyptian wall segments with engravings and heiroglyphs showing elongated heads..oh and the nefertiti head with the same features.
Somebody somewhere got the idea that an elongated head gave status..and it begs the question..from whom or what....
www.alien-ufo-pictures.com...
www.alien-ufo-pictures.com...

thanks for the reply

-Shai

Went looking for more on these skulls and this is by far the best article to date.
The skulls are not debunked..in fact they are still being found..and some showing that whoever they were, they knew a bit about brain surgery that we are only now learning how to do...
;-)

www.cassiopaea.org...

All connected to the Starchild Project, covered a couple times before within ATS:
"Starchild" skull... human mutation or hybrid?
Regards to Starchild Project

Other than the notion and theory of skull-binding, I have yet to see a report that "debunked" the skulls. Eaxctly what was "debunked"?



seekerof

I apologize in advance for being long-winded. I swear I have seen these before. I have searched the Coast to Coast AM archives and found nothing. I too have a hard time swallowing most of the bible, with the exception of some of Genesis. That being said, I do believe that some of Genesis to be true, but the social interpretations are WAAAAAYY off. Earth wasn't created in 7 days. Wasn't done through some sort of mysticism, divine magic or divine intellect. Those are the interpretations of people who didn't have (nor want) to understand scienctific forces at work. What I do believe is that another species has visited us, reproducing with an earlier "version" of human, creating modern humans. It is said in the bible that the sons of god took the daughters of man and had children. As to whether or not this was done through genetic engineering/manipulation or the old fashioned way I don't know. It also mentions that at the time of genesis, the Nephilim were also on the earth. Then there are issues of a perfect god showing all-to-human traits such as jealousy/envy, anger/hatred not to mention that if the god of genesis is omniscient then he would have known Adam and Eve would have eaten the apple and why punish someone for something you knew they would do in the first place. Its kind of like locking a child in a room with only a lighter, telling them not to play with it, and then yelling at them for starting a fire. Pure idiocy in my eyes. Or locking them in a room with nothing but a cake and telling them not to eat it.

How does all this relate?

Anyone demonstrating knowledge beyond the norm is hailed as being unique and special. People try to emulate those that are special and unique. With that being said I say the following on these skulls:

1) This is not the work of skull-binding, though skull-binding was probably conceived to emulate these beings.
2) They are probably those beings revered as gods (like I said anyone demonstrating knowledge that is beyond the norm would be, especially back then, any amount of advanced technology would do it - i.e. Alien ship landing).
3) As to whether they were alien, pre-human hominid, post-human hominid, cross breed, or even deformed humans... I would not guess without quite a bit of research being done. Though I would probably believe any other before the latter, due to the facts relating to size, shape, and cranial capacity, though I would like to have seen the rest of the skeletons.
4) There will be very little research done on these by those who dispute them because that is how mainstream science works. For example: How long did it take for someone to be able to say the Earth was round and not the center of the universe without being burned, mutilated, exiled, excommunicated, etc. ? How many scientists laughed at the idea of man flying or setting foot on the moon? Einstein may be the only exception to this rule, having suffered the least humiliation and resistance.

P.S. And to all you Hellfire and Brimstone freaks out there, yeah, I know, I am going to hell.

[edit on 4-2-2005 by technicus]