Lloyd Pye; why so much about science is wrong.

For those who are interested in some background information for that position I thought that this could perhaps be a quite interesting read.

Personally I found it very interesting and I really think that he is right there, not only because what I read there, but because I had that view already for many years now.

Here are some excerpts from his new book called “Everything You Know Is Wrong“ Lloyd Pye © 2010.

Lloyd Pye is an authority on the Intervention Theory of origins, of both life and humans. He bases his writings on over 40 years of research experience.

Science is, on the whole, as full of crap as the proverbial Christmas turkey. Very little of what they say, or pretend to know, is reliably true because so many of their pontifications are based on blatantly wrong information.

My special area of interest is human origins, and I’ve collected, and continue to collect, wonderfully convincing evidence for the argument that humans did not evolve on Earth but were genetically created to live and work as slaves and servants of superior beings sojourning here for thousands of years.

I do what I do, the way I do it, because I’m no different than scientists were when they saw and understood a clearer vision of truth than religionists had. I and others like me do the same thing now.

We know we are closer to the truth than mainstream science because our theories aren’t structured around their flagrantly incorrect baseline realities. That’s a contentious statement, but it’s true. We look back at the people living on Earth 300 years ago and we howl at their level of ignorance.

With the speed at which we can access information today, I think it’s safe to say people only 100 years from now will look back at what we “know” and will gasp with shock at the profound depth of our ignorance. That’s why I called my book about these matters Everything You Know Is Wrong. The most important of it really is wrong.

Three things science will ultimately claim as their own are a trio that today they refuse to take seriously. Any of the three will topple the fragile edifice they have constructed to explain the world as we currently perceive it.

(1) UFOs don’t exist.
(2) Aliens in those UFOs don’t exist.
(3) Hominoids such as yeti and bigfoot don’t exist.

And why don’t they exist?

Because scientists insist they don’t. Why do they insist? Because the undeniable reality of any of those three would mean that neither science nor humanity is what it is cracked up to be. Scientists would be exposed in all their buffoonery, and humanity would be seen as having no roots or existence in the flowchart of ancient life on Earth. Our world as we know it would never be the same.

To read all.

www.checktheevidence.co.uk...

I really really really Liked this S&F for you!

Lloyd Pye's intellectual property is in a permanent recession

He isn't in a position to make any claims about science and when he tries...he gets it all wrong.

Three things science will ultimately claim as their own are a trio that today they refuse to take seriously. Any of the three will topple the fragile edifice they have constructed to explain the world as we currently perceive it.

(1) UFOs don’t exist.

(2) Aliens in those UFOs don’t exist.

(3) Hominoids such as yeti and bigfoot don’t exist.

And why don’t they exist? Because scientists insist they don’t. Why do they insist? Because the undeniable reality of any of those three would mean that neither science nor humanity is what it is cracked up to be. Scientists would be exposed in all their buffoonery, and humanity would be seen as having no roots or existence in the flowchart of ancient life on Earth. Our world as we know it would never be the same.

Science doesn't claim UFOs don't exist. Science makes no claims about the occupants of UFOs because they are UFOs....Unidentified. As far as I can see those are the only two facts he claims here. The rest is typical pseudo-science BS.

He was interviewed on the Paracast and, Oh Boy! His level of thinking is awful. I'd link it, but can't find the show in the archives. He lasted half a show and shuffled away. If I can find it, I'll link it.

His Starchild Skull has been hawked around for nearly 20 years IIRC and as every doctor identified it as congenital defect so he accused them of lying. He had the DNA proven to be human in origin....maternal and paternal...called them deniers. Still to this day, his websites (he has three last time I looked) ask for donations towards having the skull analysed. That damn skull has been analysed at least twice...once by a reputable forensic scientist...once by a lab that only exists in reference to the skull.

Spacevisitor, I've read some good posts from you in threads. This isn't an attack on you. Lloyd Pye is likely just a hoaxing attention-seeker in the UFO world.

EDIT.........Found the interview....

April 8, 2007 — Lloyd Pye and Lorraine Warren

Explore the strange tale of the mysterious “Starchild” with Lloyd Pye. Is this skull from an alien/human hybrid, a hoax, or some sort of strange deformity? You’ll also hear some frightening tales of hauntings from renowned ghost hunter Lorraine Warren.

Paracast Archives

Right click...save as MP3 link

[edit on 1-2-2010 by Kandinsky]

I personally got a chuckle from this one...

Three things science will ultimately claim as their own are a trio that today they refuse to take seriously. Any of the three will topple the fragile edifice they have constructed to explain the world as we currently perceive it.

(1) UFOs don’t exist.
(2) Aliens in those UFOs don’t exist.
(3) Hominoids such as yeti and bigfoot don’t exist.

And why don’t they exist?

Because scientists insist they don’t. Why do they insist? Because the undeniable reality of any of those three would mean that neither science nor humanity is what it is cracked up to be. Scientists would be exposed in all their buffoonery, and humanity would be seen as having no roots or existence in the flowchart of ancient life on Earth. Our world as we know it would never be the same.

This is both begging the question AND leading the witness.

First, science definitely believes in UFOs - there are definitely objects that fly and are currently unidentified. There's footage, there's lots and lots and lots of witnesses that agree, yes that thing flew and no, we haven't got a clue what it was.

Science just doesn't make the leap of faith to the conclusion that it must be alien spacecraft, come to cut holes in our cows. Nor does it make similar leaps of faith to conclude that aliens and bigfoot and unicorns and Cthulhu actually exist. Why?

because there is a lack of evidence saying that they exist.

Lloyd Pye presents this as a cover-up, assuring his audience that he and they know the truth, wink wink nudge nudge, and those big-headed scientists in their labcoats and glasses are the real buffoons for believing in "evidence" and stuff. They spent how many years in school, just so they could ignore the fact that invisible pink dragons rule the planet? HA! HA! HA!

In the realm of science, UFO's might be alien spaceships. Bigfoot might exist, Intelligent life may exist in the far reaches of the universe. However given the lack of evidence for these claims, the conclusive answer is "Dunno." Science takes a "better safe than sorry" stance, in that if there is no evidence for a thing, it is assumed to not exist. The moment there is evidence, though...

And sorry. Holding a child's skull at a funny angle is not "evidence" it's manipulation.

I suspect this chap is talking to some mentally challenged child whom found a labcoat and is calling himself a scientist...

what a large chunk of insane ramblings....he any relation to Gomer Pyle...like Gomers dumber brother...

shesh...I dont even know where to begin about that rant..

oh, I got one....hey Lloyd...got a distaste for science...then stop using its creations...get off the bloody computer/typewriter/printing press and get back to drawing pictures in the sand near some cave...away with you...shoo...your words are a waste of perfectly good ones and zeros!

In the realm of science, UFO's might be alien spaceships. Bigfoot might exist, Intelligent life may exist in the far reaches of the universe. However given the lack of evidence for these claims, the conclusive answer is "Dunno." Science takes a "better safe than sorry" stance, in that if there is no evidence for a thing, it is assumed to not exist. The moment there is evidence, though...
..............................................................................
The lack of evidence, I just cringe when people say "where's the UFO evidence"

Everybody knows the hard evidence is six levels below Wright Patterson Air Force base.

Pye also points out that Darwin' theory of evolution is false. Monkeys have 48 chromosomes and humans have 46, now you can't just lose 2 chromosomes, it has to be by DNA manipulation.

Where's Zacharia Sitchin when you need him.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
He isn't in a position to make any claims about science.

Can you tell me why you think that he is not in a position to make any claims about science?

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Science doesn't claim UFOs don't exist. Science makes no claims about the occupants of UFOs because they are UFOs....Unidentified.

That’s precisely the point, because do those scientists think then that those UFO’s are flying by themselves?
Therefore does it not become time now and is it not their task then that Science starts to ask themselves the 10 million dollar questions;

1. Who are those occupants?

2. Where do they come from?

3. What is the technology they are using to come here, so that we perhaps can benefit from that technology for ourselves?

4. And why are they here?

So does it not become time to make at last a start with a serious investigation to that all which must have obviously an above top priority instead of continuing their pretty annoying attitude by ignoring and pretending it for all those decades now as if it not exist.

And if they are really smart as one would think scientists are, they can make a very good use of the already existing mountain of evidence regarding that phenomenon.

That is what Lloyd Pye means to say.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
As far as I can see those are the only two facts he claims here. The rest is typical pseudo-science BS.

That is precisely the manner of thinking science want so gladly from us all.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
He was interviewed on the Paracast and, Oh Boy! His level of thinking is awful. I'd link it, but can't find the show in the archives. He lasted half a show and shuffled away. If I can find it, I'll link it.

I see that you posted the link and I will watch it and see what happens.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Spacevisitor, This isn't an attack on you.

I am shore that that is your intention.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Lloyd Pye is likely just a hoaxing attention-seeker in the UFO world.

For me he is sorely not a hoaxing attention-seeker, and assuming that you read that whole article you must have noticed that it is not just about the UFO world.



[edit on 2/2/10 by spacevisitor]

reply to post by spacevisitor
Firstly, it was not an attack on you. I was clear that I've read your posts on other threads and enjoyed them. The post was purely on-topic and not referring to your good self

I hate fisking, so I'll try to be brief...

Can you tell me why you think that he is not in a position to make any claims about science?

To publish books and articles about the failures of science, one should have a reasonable understanding of the scientific processes. Pye's approach is to present a conclusion and look for evidence to support it. When the evidence doesn't support his conclusions, he criticises the evidence instead of reevaluating his conclusion. A good example is his 'Starchild Skull.' In spite of the independent findings that identify the skull as completely terrestrial in origin...he insists it's alien. By insisting that his 'instinct' is correct and respective fields of science are wrong, he shows little understanding of science. For this reason, he is not in a position to make claims about science.

That’s precisely the point, because do those scientists think then that those UFO’s are flying by themselves?
Therefore does it not become time now and is it not their task then that Science starts to ask themselves the 10 million dollar questions;

1. Who are those occupants?
2. Where do they come from?
3. What is the technology they are using to come here, so that we perhaps can benefit from that technology for ourselves?
4. And why are they here?

UFO reports are not all the same. Reports involve different shapes, colors, speeds, behaviour. Some are reported as 'nuts and bolts' craft. Others are orbs. Even more are unusual lights in the night sky. Different nationalities report different features of sightings. Amongst all reported sightings, we cannot know which ones are misidentified, which ones are hoaxes and which ones are part of the genuine UFO phenomena.

If we don't know what a UFO is...how can we answer any of your questions?

If a UFO flashes past witnesses or leaves a radar trace at several 1000 mp/h, how can we answer those questions?

I've read Lloyd Pye and watched his presentations. He's a distraction with no substance. My opinion is that he's a persistent character seeking attention and money. 20 years of his 'Starchild Skull' and asking for donations for 'research' supports this opinion.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

Firstly, it was not an attack on you.

Hi Kandinsky, to set things straight, I think you misunderstood my answer, I really meant that I am shore that it was not your intention to attack me, so you see that my English grammar is not as good as it must be.

I continue to read the rest of your answer now.

thanks.

i bought the star child book and some more for a real dutch price!
i am a happy man.

on the subject.
i didn't read any of Lloyd Pye so im just speculating.
so he insist on the
ET origin of the skull, and still its human dna.
that does not proof that no ET was involved, science assumes it is a really rare freak of nature.

so its a good mystery to dig into and see both sides.

and that sounds like fun to me.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by spacevisitor

Can you tell me why you think that he is not in a position to make any claims about science?

To publish books and articles about the failures of science, one should have a reasonable understanding of the scientific processes.

Reading his article he understands those scientific processes very well and regarding his saying “why so much about science is wrong”, could this be an interesting example.

Darwin Was Wrong, Scientists Argue By Lillian Kwon|Christian Post Reporter.

Darwin was wrong, a group of scientists argued at a conference in southern California.
Scientists presented evidence over the weekend refuting Charles Darwin's theory of evolution on many levels – including fossil record, natural selection and the origin of man – and his works in geology and other science areas.

"Natural selection happens but it does not do what Darwin needed it to do," said geneticist Dr. John Sanford. "Darwin built a worldview that has come to be the governing paradigm of the intellectual community; that worldview is now collapsing in the face of new advances in science."

For the rest see here.

www.christianpost.com...

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Pye's approach is to present a conclusion and look for evidence to support it. When the evidence doesn't support his conclusions, he criticises the evidence instead of reevaluating his conclusion.

Well, here is an example of that but then just the other way around.

It’s the famous Age of Sphinx Controversy of which the last word is still not been said.

But there are so many more examples.

Writer John Anthony West and Boston University geologist Robert Schoch contend that weathering of the Member II layers indicates that the Sphinx was built between 5000 and 7000 BC.

www.world-mysteries.com...

Originally posted by Kandinsky
A good example is his 'Starchild Skull.' In spite of the independent findings that identify the skull as completely terrestrial in origin...he insists it's alien.

This is what I read on his site and the investigation is still ongoing.

Ancient Bone Skull Baffles Science
Is It Human? Is It Alien? Is it BOTH?

www.starchildproject.com...

Is the Starchild Skull a deformity?
Since investigations began in 1999, multiple illnesses, ailments, and deformation processes have been suggested to explain the appearance and composition of the Starchild skull. Even Lloyd Pye, now the Project's research coordinator, originally and reflexively believed that it must be some sort of deformity.

Each of these suggestions has been taken seriously, and conscientious research has been undertaken to try and find a simple medical reason for the anomalous skull. At this time, no known medical condition or cultural practice has been found that can explain the Starchild skull.

www.starchildproject.com...

Originally posted by Kandinsky
UFO reports are not all the same. Reports involve different shapes, colors, speeds, behaviour. Some are reported as 'nuts and bolts' craft. Others are orbs. Even more are unusual lights in the night sky. Different nationalities report different features of sightings.

Amongst all reported sightings, we cannot know which ones are misidentified, which ones are hoaxes and which ones are part of the genuine UFO phenomena.

If we don't know what a UFO is...how can we answer any of your questions?

If a UFO flashes past witnesses or leaves a radar trace at several 1000 mp/h, how can we answer those questions?

Would what you said there not precisely being the reason for why science must start that investigation, in order to found out which ones are misidentified, which ones are hoaxes and here is the main reason, which ones are part of the genuine UFO phenomena.

Also, to spare unnecessary time and money and to boost that investigation, it would be very logical when they [science] start with making contact with all these already available government, military, and intelligence community witnesses who had personal, first hand experience with UFOs, ETs, ET technology.

It would no doubt blow their mind and would answer already a great part of my questions?



[edit on 2/2/10 by spacevisitor]

reply to post by spacevisitor

Darwin Was Wrong, Scientists Argue By Lillian Kwon|Christian Post Reporter.

Darwin was wrong, a group of scientists argued at a conference in southern California. Scientists presented evidence over the weekend refuting Charles Darwin's theory of evolution on many levels – including fossil record, natural selection and the origin of man – and his works in geology and other science areas.

"Natural selection happens but it does not do what Darwin needed it to do," said geneticist Dr. John Sanford. "Darwin built a worldview that has come to be the governing paradigm of the intellectual community; that worldview is now collapsing in the face of new advances in science."

A group of scientists can agree that Darwin was wrong. Science allows for a consensus and couldn't exist without it. The consensus is overwhelmingly in support of evolution.

The Theory of Evolution is, arguably, no longer Darwin's. It exists in a way that is not dependent on any single area of science. It's supported by evidence from inter-disciplinary subjects within science. Each strand and example can be cross-referenced and substantiated. Natural selection and speciation is evident in small contemporary samples of moth, butterfly, worm and bacteria. It's also evident against greater time-frames of the fossil record.

The origin of man is indicated by the fossil record and comparison to other contemporary mammals, monkeys and primates...

This illustration offers a general idea of the phylogroups that have led to our existence...



This illustration shows the evolutionary path we've taken from our our distant ancestors...all supported by what we've learned from the fossil record....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/13b6cf288ea9.jpg[/atsimg]

From the remnants and bones of our hominid ancestors, we can identify even more differences and stages that led to us....homo sapiens sapiens...



Pye knows nothing about the science behind the Theory of Evolution. He probably knows less than high school kids studying science. I won't comment on the 'Christianpost' link.

If you're trying to find answers to the UFO phenomena, Pye doesn't have them. Keep looking like the rest of us

Originally posted by downunderET
The lack of evidence, I just cringe when people say "where's the UFO evidence"

Everybody knows the hard evidence is six levels below Wright Patterson Air Force base.

Can you prove it? Not only that it's there, but that it is extraterrestrial in origin?

Until you can, skepticism is the default position.

Pye also points out that Darwin' theory of evolution is false. Monkeys have 48 chromosomes and humans have 46, now you can't just lose 2 chromosomes, it has to be by DNA manipulation.

Where's Zacharia Sitchin when you need him.

First, chimpanzees aren't monkeys. They're hominid apes.

Second, this may surprise you, but... genetic manipulation isn't magic. it can't violate gene theory, and it can't do anything that couldn't be accomplished in nature. All it does is up the odds for any given change.

In the specific case of humans, all that happened is somewhere along our ancestor tree, some pairs of small chromosomes fused into larger ones. Unlike the case with Turner's Syndrome or Down's syndrome, this fusion neither lost or added extra genetic material. This may be your second surprise, but the fusion of chromosomes in the human ancestry didn't change us at all. We are functionally identical to chimpanzees, the main differences actually exist outside the genes themselves, and are instead dependent on the "on and off" switches for those genes, to put it simply.

This doesn't require genetic manipulation by an alien entity. All it needs is for some mutants to get lucky with the ladies.

Wow. I didn't know about this guy until I read this thread. I just had a quick glance over his Wikipedia article, and the guy is clearly a massive joke.

How can anyone take him seriously? He's an absolute idiot.

Originally posted by davesidious
Wow. I didn't know about this guy until I read this thread. I just had a quick glance over his Wikipedia article, and the guy is clearly a massive joke.
How can anyone take him seriously? He's an absolute idiot.

You did not know this guy until you read this thread, you just had a quick glance over his Wikipedia article, and because of that you come to the conclusion that the guy is clearly a massive joke, then you wonder how anyone can take him seriously and you even claim that he's an absolute idiot.

Well, I didn't know you until you post this reply, I just had a quick glance over your extended profile page, so how would you think about me when I would say here that because of that I did come to the conclusion that you are clearly a massive joke.

That I wonder myself how anyone can take you seriously and that I would say that you are an absolute idiot.

How would you like that for a change?

reply to post by spacevisitor


I couldn't care less if you come to such a conclusion from just the contents of my extended profile page. Someone who does that is clearly not playing with a full deck.

I read how Lloyd Pye, the psychologist, clearly has no idea of the scientific method, yet thinks so highly of himself to lambast it. I can read that in a few seconds, and from that I can know, with overwhelming certainty, that the guy is an ass. The excerpts from his book, posted here, are enough to condemn the man's intellectual honesty. He makes false assumption after false assumption of the scientific method and science in general, for the world to see, and uses those as the lynch-pin for his entire argument. That is a logical fallacy.

So yeah, the guy's an idiot who knows next to nothing about science, and yet chooses to show the world just how much of an idiot he is by attacking his science straw man.

Originally posted by Kandinsky

His Starchild Skull has been hawked around for nearly 20 years IIRC and as every doctor identified it as congenital defect so he accused them of lying. He had the DNA proven to be human in origin....maternal and paternal...called them deniers. Still to this day, his websites (he has three last time I looked) ask for donations towards having the skull analysed. That damn skull has been analysed at least twice...once by a reputable forensic scientist...once by a lab that only exists in reference to the skull.

That's not true. Watch any video on YouTube about the Starchild Skull. It's DNA showed that only its mother was human. It's father was nonhuman. That's why it's called a hybrid.

Stop spreading disinformation about Lloyd Pye.

Watch his lecture here. It makes a lot of sense.

www.youtube.com...

And listen to him explain why the Starchild Skull is not human on Coast to Coast:

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Originally posted by davesidious
Wow. I didn't know about this guy until I read this thread. I just had a quick glance over his Wikipedia article, and the guy is clearly a massive joke.
How can anyone take him seriously? He's an absolute idiot.

You did not know this guy until you read this thread, you just had a quick glance over his Wikipedia article, and because of that you come to the conclusion that the guy is clearly a massive joke, then you wonder how anyone can take him seriously and you even claim that he's an absolute idiot.

Well, I didn't know you until you post this reply, I just had a quick glance over your extended profile page, so how would you think about me when I would say here that because of that I did come to the conclusion that you are clearly a massive joke.

That I wonder myself how anyone can take you seriously and that I would say that you are an absolute idiot.

How would you like that for a change?

Wikipedia is against ALL conspiracies and paranormal phenomena. To learn about someone, you gotta listen to their lecture or read their book. Otherwise you miss out on the wisdom and knowledge they are trying to give you. Same with David Icke. If you listen to establishment sources, you'll think Icke is a nut. If you listen to Icke's best lectures for a few hours, you will think he is one of the most brilliant people in the world and have an awakening and understand why they want you to think he's a nut. He exposes things you aren't supposed to know.

You guys are saying that Lloyd ignores the evidence. You got it backwards. Lloyd's theories fit the evidence and account for the data, and connect the dots. It is establishment science that religiously holds to its outdated views and IGNORES the evidence.

To learn more about how skeptics hijack the word skeptic and spin it around to mean its opposite as disinfo, see here:

www.debunkingskeptics.com...

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

Darwin Was Wrong, Scientists Argue By Lillian Kwon|Christian Post Reporter.

Darwin was wrong, a group of scientists argued at a conference in southern California. Scientists presented evidence over the weekend refuting Charles Darwin's theory of evolution on many levels – including fossil record, natural selection and the origin of man – and his works in geology and other science areas.

"Natural selection happens but it does not do what Darwin needed it to do," said geneticist Dr. John Sanford. "Darwin built a worldview that has come to be the governing paradigm of the intellectual community; that worldview is now collapsing in the face of new advances in science."

A group of scientists can agree that Darwin was wrong. Science allows for a consensus and couldn't exist without it. The consensus is overwhelmingly in support of evolution.

The Theory of Evolution is, arguably, no longer Darwin's. It exists in a way that is not dependent on any single area of science. It's supported by evidence from inter-disciplinary subjects within science. Each strand and example can be cross-referenced and substantiated. Natural selection and speciation is evident in small contemporary samples of moth, butterfly, worm and bacteria. It's also evident against greater time-frames of the fossil record.

The origin of man is indicated by the fossil record and comparison to other contemporary mammals, monkeys and primates...

This illustration offers a general idea of the phylogroups that have led to our existence...



This illustration shows the evolutionary path we've taken from our our distant ancestors...all supported by what we've learned from the fossil record....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/13b6cf288ea9.jpg[/atsimg]

From the remnants and bones of our hominid ancestors, we can identify even more differences and stages that led to us....homo sapiens sapiens...



Pye knows nothing about the science behind the Theory of Evolution. He probably knows less than high school kids studying science. I won't comment on the 'Christianpost' link.

If you're trying to find answers to the UFO phenomena, Pye doesn't have them. Keep looking like the rest of us

You are merely parroting the establishment's views.

The reason there is a consensus isn't because a bunch of freethinkers got together and agreed on evolution. It is a manufactured consensus in that if you don't agree with the official views, you don't get a professional career in anthropology and you lose your funding. It works the same in any establishment institution. You have to believe what the system tells you or you don't advance. It starts in public school. That is how you are brainwashed.

The consensus is by force. Only those who agree advance. Those who don't, don't get to be scientists who get funding.

Did you ever realize that? Or do you honestly believe that authority = truth?

"Just look at us. Everything is backwards. Everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information, and religion destroys spirituality." - Michael Ellner

Btw, how do you explain the sudden onset of human intelligence? Science has no explanation for that. Even Carl Sagan was at a loss to explain it. See his book "Dragons of Eden".

reply to post by WWu777

Stop spreading disinformation about Lloyd Pye.

Here's Pye in the Minnesota MUFON Journal of May/June this year...

As of now, the geneticist feels he has isolated the Starchild’s mitochondrial DNA, which was also found in 2003. He also feels he has started recovering the nuclear DNA, which could not be accomplished with the technology of 2003. And understand that if he does recover nuclear DNA, we will be ready to prove what we said all along we could prove: that the Starchild’s genetic profile is significantly different from a human’s. At that point all we’ll need is the money needed to recover the entire genome, and money should readily flow toward a project with such enormous financial potential.

More BS and begging from Pye

Do geneticists 'feel' their way to conclusions or depend on scientific data? How many more times will Pye be asking for money to complete these tests that are always so close to proof? He's been at this game for longer than some ATS members have been alive.