Starchild Skull DNA Testing Proves Not From This Earth

now had i been two years younger i would have agreed completely with you, and i would still say the skull had a far greater probability of being a purely human skull.
i just believe that no matter how improbable the alternative is it must be tested.
most people would tell you it is a human skull, they are probably right on the money there.
but some people believe there to be an alternative and that it must be tested.
well the test was inconclusive regarding the proof of extra terrestrial intelligence.
but it was just that inconclusive.
now i still say that an answer cannot be gained from the knowledge and fact we have.

you probably remember the example about the geocentrical view of our solar system, back then most people of the era believed that the earth was in the center of the universe.
now what would have happened if copernicus had simply taken this for the answer??

well we would first of all have missed out on another big discovery, what is even worse we would have missed the scientific revolution that copernicus's work and other stuff like it sparked, it was even called the copernican revolution.

now if he had done as you do now, then there would have been no revolution and where would we be now had that been the case.

i just do not believe that any scientific or academic question can be correctly answered without exploring all the possible opportunities.
now i agree that the UFO community needs to tighten up and start doing things seriously, on that part we agree.
we do not however agree on how to do this, you say we should simply dismiss anything too weird or too coincidental so that the academic community respects us, well guess what, that is not what the scientific nor the academic circles will after simply 'concluding' based on entirely circumstential evidence, they would respect a true scientific study into pretty much anything you can imagine, as long as it is done right.

well now i have said what i needed to say, i don't think i can make it much more clear than this.

reply to post by Oodain


but the whole problem with that is that the so called ET view was based on the fact of not being able to extract the fathers DNA...

had it been that they found some form of genetic code not seen anywhere on Earth that wasnt even in DNA format or some such theyd have a case. But a absence of DNA doesnt indicate non earthly origin, but what youv esuggested , testing all hypothesis no matter how weird creates a infinite amount of alteratives, any idea that anyone could think of would have to be tested even if the preliminary investigation yielded nothing that would lean in that direction.

to put it more simply, when you go to the doctor and you descirbe your symptoms, he will test you for what he suspects the disease to be..
h doesnt just start running tests for everything that could possibly be, he takes the most likely and runs tests for those.

If you get a stuffy nose, alot of caughing, you could have syhphillis, acute HIV syndrome due to seroconversion, and a whole host of other deadly illnesses that have cold like symptoms in their initial stages. But do you get al those tests done? No, because the doctor usually suspects and you usually have cold. Now if the cold doesnt go away the doctor may suspect something else and have you tested further but that was in response to something that actually led in that direction, not just for the sake of testing an alternative.

OK can some of you experts explain what junk DNA is for and why do we have it?Do I think the skull is alien hell I dont know.But I wouldnt call those who do believe it silly or simple minded.Until the mystery of junk DNA is solved I wont sit here a pretend that we have all the information there is about genetics.

well sad as it may seem i think we have misunderstood each other, i did in my previous post say that i found the 'claim' of it being an alien just as wrong as i find the idea of not testing and yes i know that we probably cannot extract a viable sample from the current skull.
and i do agree that the evidence as of now do point toward a genetic 'mishap'
essentially what i am saying is, just because you cant find the answer you don't make one up, there is no evidence pointing in either way.
we cannot come with a final conclusion from the facts at hand.
i am not saying the alien theory holds merit, i am however saying that one cannot come to the conclusion the skull is entirely human either, this idea however holds more merrit.

reply to post by NavalFC

but the whole problem with that is that the so called ET view was based on the fact of not being able to extract the fathers DNA...

For this thread alone perhaps. But in reality the argument that the Starchild skull could be ET in nature stems from far more than just the lack of detectable human male DNA.

There are a number of abnormalities in the skull that compared to known deformities are unique. There is also the existence of "fibers" in the skull's composition. You can read all about it on The Starchild Project website.

The way it has been explained on the site, whatever chemistry is used to detect the presence of human DNA has only detected mitochondrial DNA based on the mother. The father's DNA has not been detected. Like you have stated before, it is entirely possible that the father's DNA has decomposed beyond the point of being detectable. But the possibility also exists that the DNA is there, but not detectable via whatever chemistry they use to find human DNA. Disregarding speciation (bear with me), if the DNA is there, it has to be non-human. That is their argument. The idea that it may be ET DNA is of course what they're hoping for.

It is fact that the skull belonged to a living thing with a human mother. It would make logical sense then to assume it had a human father. The hybrid theory is a large leap to make especially considering what we know about ETs and speciation right?

I do recall however another case of a human being without a human father. His name was Jesus. Or something.

reply to post by Oodain


Oodain there are those of us who understood exactly where you are coming from.However there are those who mission in life it is to "debunk" any and everything that is in opposition to whatever view they hold.I dont even have to read certain post to know where they are coming from.Just the name and or avatar lets me know where they stand.

Being open minded goes both ways.Some of us that believe in intelligent alien life can get a bit carried away imo.Same goes for those who do not believe.

reply to post by Tricky63


junk DNA Isnt really junk, its just inactive. it may have been responsible for traits we had in the past when the human genome was fundamentally different but as evolution progressed and the human genome kept changing certain parts of the DNA became in active. However sometimes some of these areas do become actve again and is suspected as the source for some cancers

Originally posted by NavalFC
reply to post by Tricky63

 

junk DNA Isnt really junk, its just inactive. it may have been responsible for traits we had in the past when the human genome was fundamentally different but as evolution progressed and the human genome kept changing certain parts of the DNA became in active. However sometimes some of these areas do become actve again and is suspected as the source for some cancers

So its just theory and no one really knows? My point being that we can all speculate and have a general idea but no rock solid proof.The other side would say that yes it is inactive but it will be activated and we will evolve into something or whatever.They would be speculating as well with no rock solid proof point being nobody knows for sure we just go with what makes sense to us.

I would lean more to what you said about it. That feels right to me but who knows perhaps im wrong

Hey Naval,
You need to stop being defensive and start using your imagination to ask the right scientific questions:

1) Mitochondrial DNA is used for metabolism. Is it an ESSENTIAL ingredient to every humanoid species regardless of origin?

2) Why can't human precursor sequences bind to the DNA to perform PCR amplification?

If you can't address those two questions without an emotional response, you are not worthy to be included in the field of serious scientific inquiry.

And by the way:

A group of researchers working at the Human Genome Project indicate that they made an astonishing scientific discovery: They believe so-called 97% non-coding sequences in human DNA (Hey naval, that's your your junk-DNA they are talking about here) is no less than genetic code of extraterrestrial life forms.

THE HGP scientists said that, not me.
-ATS4Dummies

[edit on 7-12-2008 by ATS4dummies]

It would have been better if they had the whole skeleton along with the alleged mother's remains for comparison. Could they than map her DNA to find a possible cause? idk

I have to wonder though if there may also be any genetic evidence if a disease or chemical in the environment where the remains were found that could cause this deformity.

Alien beings or 'fallen' (entities?) as suggested by some old scriptures, may actually manipulate DNA without the use of adding another genetic material. It's already been shown in one documentary that a frog's egg could be changed to a salamander.....just with a laser?

there are other alleged skulls, some of which were also said to be faked in some way.

In a conspiracy site such as this, there's always the possibilities of either real or faked evidence, even the posibility of disinformation by the military.

As I said before, the simple fact it has taken so long for these tests to be performed and then asking for money suggests fraud or even maybe a limited disclosure of something extraordinary, even though it appears there are yet no other publicly "known" examples. The CIA has also been accused of using any means possible to achieve funds for projects. (another can of worms)

I think Lloyd Pye said, on C2C that the mother was in fact (human) of Earth but the father was an off-worlder ET.

Very interesting indeed. Why doesn't he go on Larry King Live or inquire about that?

reply to post by NavalFC


Just because there is no nuclear DNA does NOT mean it is alien. That is simply a bad conclusion.

NavalFC you bring up an interesting point. In one post you say we know a lot about genetics because we can do A, B and C. Basically, you listed several benchmarks of our progress in that area. When another poster said "Yes, but we can't do D, E and F in genetics", you jump all over him for requiring benchmarks. That is a little hypocritical isn't it? You cried foul when he applied benchmarks to genetics but that is exactly what you did to 'prove' we are advanced in genetics.

Also, on speciation you conclusion is wrong. Hybridization is a scenario of speciation. IF there was an alien/ET whatever you want to call it genetically compatible enough with humans to produce an offspring then that is a hybrid. A hybrid IS a form of speciation.

reply to post by DroolsAlot


The "Starchild" skull is still quite fascinating, even if it is human. The characteristics of it are different than that of the rest of us. The bone structure being lighter and yet much stronger should be enough to cause more serious research on the find.

I hate posting anonymously because im im a different sysetem...

This just add's weight or proves that the account in Gen 6 has merit. "the sons of god came down and had children with women of men". Of coarse that would be beyond most people but doesnt that make sense? They can finger the mother but not the father? The child is a nephilim. Beleive it or not but there is your proof. It cant be MS or anyother desiese or they would be able to determine the father and identify the aliment.

Come on wake up and deny ignorance!

Originally posted by NavalFC
oh and those comments about genetics, just incase you didnt realize, weve gotten to the point in genetics whee they can map your genome and tell you what sort of disaeses you are more vulnerable to, how srong your body is against HIV, cancer risk, etcetc so to say we dont know much about genetics is pure bull..

So humans in the past hmm what 50-100 (don't know exactly) years made such astonishing advances in genetics that we are able to do all the things You stated , and probably much more (which is not being fully disclosed yet due to further testing required) . So now imagine what we will be able to do in the field of genetics in lets say 200-500 years ...

and

You are telling me that a species (if they do exist) being thousands if not tens of thousands years more advanced in no way would be able to genetically engineer a human fetus injecting it with alien DNA ?

And You know it how ?

Lol I just love people that seem to know everything there is to know just based on the fact of human evolution .. rofl

Originally posted by NavalFC
[but the whole problem with that is that the so called ET view was based on the fact of not being able to extract the fathers DNA...

No.

There's a couple of reasons why they think it might have some ET qualities.

Do some research and see for yourself. Read an article or two about it, as the DNA is not the only interesting aspect of the skull.

Originally posted by NavalFC
junk DNA Isnt really junk, its just inactive. it may have been responsible for traits we had in the past

See that word I bolded in your quote? That means that you have NO IDEA that what you are proposing is true. You are speculating, guessing and taking a blind stab in the dark.

Wouldn't it be great if humans knew more about genetics, hey?

[edit on 7-12-2008 by tezzajw]

reply to post by GTORick


GTOrick, I did not say it was ALIEN. Yourve got me pegged for someone else.

And as far as with the genetics poster, What I sought to do was demonstrate our knowledge was not as abysmal as he said. Those werent benchmarks as his were, just examples.

to try and defend the whole starchild skull nonsense by saying we just dont know enough is ludircous. Is that how we can argue things is by bringing a hypothesis and then stating it must be true because we don't know enough?


Furthermore I find it ever more so disturbing that the person behind the Star child nonsense is already selling books, taking donations and other money making activities over this skull as if it were half alien when such is not even confirmed! Utter academic dishonesty and unscientific especially when natural known explanations work. A Mutatio , deformed hydrocephalic skull. such a deformation woulc accout for the larger frontal lobe area as well as the eye sockets and indeed the bone at the back of the skull as in severe cases the optic nerve is lowered.

I do not see the C1/Baso Junctio , as such an alaysis of how it connects to the neck is made much more difficult.



Also your arguments regarding speciation - Thats a big IF in your proposal..

fo speciation to occur between an alien species and humans they would have to be even closer related then apes and humans. Very very close, sharing most of the same DNA.

But we are talking about a speciies that evlved on a whole different planet, given the different environmental conditions there would have been different selective pressures on their species guiding its evolution and thus they would have come out very differently and unlikely to share such a close genetic match with humans.

reply to post by ATS4dummies


ATS4dummies that is academiclly dishonest, you are now a liar. No scientists has ever said "97 percent of our DNA is that of extra terrestrial life forms"

That is a UTTER LIE. You are the one not worhty of scientifc inquiry. What they said was alot of our DNA was not human DNA. Do you know why? Tell me, what creatures, non humans, do we share the majority of our DNA in common with? This shouldnt be to hard.

As far as your next question, Polymerase Chain Reaction is a technique for replicating DNA IN VITRO, and a precurosr is needed to start the replication process.

Has Obama's DNA been checked?

You never know.

Just a thought


MF

Originally posted by Tricky63
OK can some of you experts explain what junk DNA is for and why do we have it?

"Junk DNA" is a misnomer that is used more by popular culture than by scientists. At one time or another, about 95% of DNA has been classified as "junk" but as we learn more and more about DNA, this number has decreased, and will continue to as we learn more.