I agree that the SC skull 'looks' like what we would expect an alien grey's to look like. Unfortunately we only have representations of what a grey
looks like. Furthermore we only have the word of others that such creatures exist at all. I'd be about as surprised if they exist as I would be if
they didn't.
What interests me with the SC skull is the man presenting the evidence. We can't prove aliens, but we can get a fair idea about the integrity of Pye.
Has he left out evidence that leads people to conclude that 'in all probability' the skull is human?
Has he presented ALL the evidence?
Is his presentation of the evidence neutral or leading?
Does he have an agenda that requires the SC skull to remain intriguing and inconclusive?
Does he have an incentive to leave out evidence?
These are a few questions we can look at in the hopes of achieving an indication as to what the SC skull really is. If the man has concealed evidence
and has an incentive to continue to do so; we can infer that he's dishonest. If he's dishonest, then rational, terrestrial explanations for the
skull would be more likely to be accurate. Is that a reasonable stance?
The sample taken from the Starchild Skull (SCS-1) has mtDNA consistent with Native American haplogroup C, as revealed through two independent
extractions performed on fragments of parietal bone. While a single first extraction did not appear to type similarly, this inconsistent result is
likely a product of a low level of contamination.
DNA analysis report from Starchild Project
site
The human mother is definitely a native American. What about the father? We can't ask the lab '
'Trace
Genetics' because they have possibly gone out of business. The only report that references them is Pye's, but that isn't to imply it's a
hoax report. They could have legitimately gone bust.
Nuclear DNA is difficult to extract from old bones and even more so if the remains had been subject to the environment e.g soil acidity, erosion etc.
These factors aren't made clear by Pye. Instead he uses the absence of such evidence to lead the reader. It's fairly well worded, but the affect on
the average reader's interpretation would encourage doubts of human parentage...
Attempts to recover DNA from the skull easily produced its mitochondrial DNA, which proved its mother was fully human. However, no nuclear DNA
could be recovered using human-only primers, which strongly indicates that the skull's father was something other than a typical human.
Starchild Project (Overview)
DNA sample was taken from the skull, and was subjected to DNA probes designed to detect sequences of DNA that are unique to humans (performed by
Dr. David Sweet, Director of the Bureau of Legal Dentistry at the University of British Columbia)5. The Starchild skull DNA was found to contain both
an X and a Y chromosome. This is conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as
well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes.
The New England
Sceptic
DNA tests were conducted on the teeth as they contain the strongest chances of recovering DNA markers. The site doesn't offer a source for the
'Y-Chromosome' claim, however
Dr David Sweetdoes exist. He is
associated with criminal investigation where DNA and forensic analysis is required. A possible source for the DNA evidence was from
here at Rense. So, has Pye left out the evidence that proves the skull is that of a human?
His focus appears to be on demonstrating to readers that it can't be human. He does this by pointing out differences in a normal human sample. The
skull is not normal and didn't come from a normal human. It came from a deformed child. The child was aged around 4-5 years old and possibly died due
to difficulties of it's condition.
The argument he uses about its extraordinary brain size (skull capacity) is inaccurate. He again leads the reader to share his conclusions and uses
uncited claims.
The most reasonable explanation for the morphology of the skull is a condition known as
brachycephaly. Skulls very similar to the SC are found
here,
here and the fused skull is explained and
illustrated
here.
Pye makes a lot of the extraordinary size of the skull and claims it's 200cc larger than the average human. It isn't clear where the large capacity
measurements are from and based on the video comparison it actually isn't larger than an adult human. It looks much smaller in comparison to Pye's
own head. His figure of 1600cc is large, but not unusual...
Figures for the average brain size of modern humans tend to vary between sources, but a typical value is 1350 or 1400 cc (cubic centimetres). The
following figures should convey a feel for the normal range of variation in human skulls. Burenhult (1993) states that the 90% of humans fit in the
range 1040-1595 cc, and that the extreme range is 900-2000 cc.
Talk Origins
So...he runs at least two websites. He sells a $30 book that is wholly based on the SC being hybrid alien. He tours the alien/paranormal circuit. He
is interviewed in magazines and online. His incentive is making a living or at least subsidizing one. His agenda is ancient alien visitors and the
typical mash-up of pyramids, aliens, bigfoots and hybridized aliens. Alien interventions etc. New results are scheduled for 2009-2010
The clever
man would have a book and a tour timed for the event. The cautious man will yet again claim that DNA evidence remains 'inconclusive.'
It fails on at least two counts. 1-It looks nothing like a 'grey alien' apart from black eyes. 2-It looks
nothing like the child would have looked like...even to an idiot. 
