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.
Artificial cranial deformation is usually carried out on an infant, when the skull is at its most pliable. In a typical case, head-binding begins approximately a month after birth and continues for at least six months, but usually longer. Therefore, the discovery of a newborn baby with an elongated skull suggests that artificial cranial deformation did not take place, since a greater length of time is needed to create the shape changes to the skull.
However, while cranial deformation changes the shape of the skull, it does not alter other features that are characteristic of a regular human skull. Yet the Paracas elongated skulls do contain features that differ from a typical human skull, including the different positioning of the foramen magnum, a very pronounced zygomatic arch (cheek bone), different eye sockets and no sagittal suture, which is a connective tissue joint between the two parietal bones of the skull. This suggests that that the elongation of the Paracas skulls may have been natural and not artificially produced.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
All newborns have misshapen skulls. The fontanel (soft spot) is designed for just this reason. So baby doesn't suffer a crushed skull at birth.
The finding was announced by Brien Foerster of Hidden Inca Tours
originally posted by: orgncpndmc
The finding was announced by Brien Foerster of Hidden Inca Tours
Not exactly credible last i checked
originally posted by: gnostician
In the past it was questioned by many if some of the elongated skulls of Paracas are naturally formed or all of them are the result of head binding. If this new found baby skull's age is indeed between 0-3 months, then head binding has to be ruled out as it takes at least 6 months to form the typical shape of the elongated skulls through head binding.
originally posted by: FamCore
If this is the skull of a newborn, I'm not sure how this could have been achieved through the process of "binding".
.
originally posted by: micpsi
a reply to: Marduk
You seem to misunderstand and to miss the point. Foerster did not deny that head binding could have begun at birth. The point you either failed to understand or are deliberately ignoring is that the baby was too young for binding to have had enough time to elongate its skull. Medical doctors told him how old the baby was when it died.
originally posted by: eletheia
a reply to: Harte
Something no one has mentioned .... A difficult natural birth, which happens
sometimes can leave the infant with an elongated head.
This happened to my grandson, who in the end had to have an assisted delivery
and his head was elongated for a while it took sometime to return to 'normal'
If he had for any reason died within that time he too would have had an abnormal
skull
originally posted by: eletheia
a reply to: Harte
A difficult natural birth, which happens
sometimes can leave the infant with an elongated head.
This happened to my grandson, who in the end had to have an assisted delivery
and his head was elongated for a while it took sometime to return to 'normal'
If he had for any reason died within that time he too would have had an abnormal
skull
Technically, dolichocephaly is a mild cranial deformity in which the head has become disproportionately long and narrow, due to mechanical forces associated with breech positioning in utero
TOUR PRICING:
MAIN TOUR: $3395 USD
($500 Deposit / Single Room Supplement $650)
BOLIVIA EXTENSION: $1695 USD
($300 Deposit / Single Room Supplement $450)