It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEW! Starchild Skull DNA Result..

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:47 PM
reply to post by spikey

I don't disagree with that. I was thinking about that myself earlier.

As to the clone thing - it would be a clone depending on how much alteration was done on the original DNA. It could also depend on if two sets where unentangled and then allowed to reform with meosis.

That could account for a "two human females" result actually.

However, so could one of the parents being intersexed/chimeric and fertile.

[edit on 2010/8/11 by Aeons]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 06:16 PM
As I posted earlier. I emailed the Starchild website and asked for information regarding "progeria" and the starchild skull. I have followed the progression of the testing on the skull for several years and have not read or heard of any thing regarding"progeria" and this skull. Here are the contents of the email that I received from Llyod minutes ago. I do not know what stars and flags are for but I do feel that I deserve some for my effort in contacting Lloyd. Below is the email in its entirity minus my email address because i do not want people flaming me. ENJOY!!

The progeria issue is a huge pain in our ass because it's what Wikipedia promotes as the cause and simple-minded folks go straight to Wikipedia to solve any problem and they believe everything Wikipedia says. They don't understand that Wikipedia exists to do one thing, which is to support as strongly as possible the consensus of mainstream science. So because the mainstream doesn't want aliens to be real, they write all kinds of nonsense on the Starchild's Wikipedia page and let no changes be made to the distortions of truth and outright lies that are one it.

Progeria is a well-known but extremely rare disorder. It impacts a number of parts of a victim's body, including its skull. But the skull remains fundamentally that of a human. There may be some mild thinning of the bone in the upper part of the cranium, and possibly in other parts of the skull, but nothing on the scale of the thinning of the Starchild's bone. And a progeria victim's bone remains fully human bone. The Starchild's bone has the biochemistry of tooth enamel rather than bone, so no comparison there.

In every part of a progeria victim's head you have a human counterpart. They have normal human eye sockets, normal foramen magnum placement, normal neck attachments, normal chewing muscle attachments, most definitely an inion, they have sinuses (though often reduced like other parts of the face under the cranium), they have brow ridges and a dip from that ridge down to the beginning of their noses, a curved roof of their mouths, normal inner ears, etc.

The Starchild has NONE of those typically human features. In fact, there are NO typically human features left in the Starchild skull. That's why it has been of such interest for 11.5 years. Its physiology screams out that it is not human, but only DNA can nail that argument shut in our favor, and now we have that on our side. So let the crybabies squawk about it all they want.
In due course our turn will come to trump them all, and I'm sure none of their challengers will ever hear a peep of apology. That's not the kind of people they are.

You can use this information however you want to do battle with those forces of ignorance!

Good luck!


-----Original Message-----
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:18 PM
To: ''
Subject: email from website

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 06:24 PM
reply to post by Jesuswasasailor

Good job on the E-mail. His response is interesting none the less.

You get a star from me Friend.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 06:24 PM
reply to post by Jesuswasasailor

simple-minded folks go straight to Wikipedia to solve any problem and they believe everything Wikipedia says. They don't understand that Wikipedia exists to do one thing, which is to support as strongly as possible the consensus of mainstream science. So because the mainstream doesn't want aliens to be real, they write all kinds of nonsense on the Starchild's Wikipedia page and let no changes be made to the distortions of truth and outright lies that are one it.

No kidding! So Wikipedia is part of an anti alien conspiracy!
His reply doesn't sound like the rant of a nut at all!
Why is he doing any "testing" anyway? He KNOWS the TRUTH about the STARCHILD ALREADY!

Please! This is BS!
My last post on this ridiculous topic!

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 06:25 PM

Originally posted by Jesuswasasailor
As I posted earlier. I emailed the Starchild website and asked for infThey don't understand that Wikipedia exists to do one thing, which is to support as strongly as possible the consensus of mainstream science. So because the mainstream doesn't want aliens to be real...

Sigh. Lloyd Pye is a class act. Science most certainly does "want aliens to be real", which is why we legitimately search for life outside of earth in many areas of science. But science has a process and a method by which hypotheses and evidence must be subjected to.

Whenever anyone's hypotheses and evidence become rejected by proper scientific protocol and the rebuttal is something like what Lloyd Pye just wrote, you know you're dealing with a desperate pseudoscientific buffoon. The truth is that Pye wants aliens to be real and he's transparently desperate to get his name in history books with his fraud of an "alien skull".

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:27 PM
What's really laughable about all this, is how the con artist in the video duped so many ATSers.

The whole "StarChild" thing has been done to death. Also, from utilizing the handy dandy search function, it's obvious Maybe...Maybe Not has done more ACTUAL RESEARCH on this skull than literally ANYONE else posting.

It's also ironic how "skeptics" get blasted, even though they're really the ones with the open minds, because, HEAVEN FORBID anyone challenges the "MUST BE E.T!!!" attitude of the "believers."

Look, you'd do well to understand how easy it is to be made a fool of in today's world. You have con artists, liars, cheats, frauds, and charlatans everywhere. Unfortunately, UFOlogy has attracted its fair share and the only real way for any of us to do anything about it is to stop buzzing about the less than honest rantings of all of them.

Including Mr. Pye.

[edit on 11-8-2010 by SaosinEngaged]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:44 PM

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
You skeptics are o so boring People with no imagination or intrigue in your lives, proof of this proof of that! sometimes as this thread provides there has to be a little intrigue something that blows you away, if an ET walked up to you an bit you on the nose an done a disappearing trick you still would'n believe it because you only have the scratch on your nose as proof!

PS this Skull is based on a DNA test we are still waiting for more confirmed evidence! its not over yet by a long shot!

Thanks to the OP, great find.

Anyone who shoots this new info down without looking it over is just as bad as anyone who runs around shouting "It's an Alien/human hybrid, it's proof of crossbreeding with aliens!"

I want more data / confirmation of the following:

1. The skull is significantly thinner than a normal skull, possessing features not found on any other skull to date, differing in more than two-dozen ways from a normal skull..

2. Where the marrow was and where it should be clean after 900 years there is instead unknown deposits of a red material.

3. The also unidentified fiberlike matter running through the entire skull as evidenced by the sectional cut out - which is found in no other skull to date.

4. The chemical analysis of the skull is completely different than all known skulls to date: From highest to lowest, a normal skull has concentrations of Calcium, Phosphorus, Oxygen, and Carbon in descending order. The so-called "Starchild" has this all juggled around - From highest to lowest, its' concentrations of these elements goes Carbon, Calcium, Oxygen, and Phosphorous.

5. The most important feature is the DNA: The mitochondrial DNA is definitely human. But it is the Nuclear DNA that expresses the the blueprint for the being that forms.

The "Starchild's" Nuclear DNA appears to be wildly different from anything seen before, to the point where the National Institutes of Health's genome database could not come up with a match - could not confirm it as even a human being.

Possible explanations:

A. The starchild was a significantly mutated human being, where the mutations were not bad enough to kill it in the womb or as a baby, incredibly.

B. The starchild was non-human, from the nucleus of another species' fertilized egg (non-human father and non-human mother) implanted in to a human egg which had had its own nucleus removed. The being resulting being would have 100% human mitochondrial DNA, and 100% non-human Nuclear DNA. It would be 100% non-human. It would NOT be a "Hybrid" or crossbred.

The real end of this (Or the beginning of something really mind-blowing) should come once they are able to raise the money to perform sequencing
on the entire genome instead of a small snippet of it.

[edit on 11-8-2010 by mydarkpassenger]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:02 PM
reply to post by SaosinEngaged

After a rant like that, I have only one question...
Are you sure you aren't Benjamin Fulford?

Even he includes the occasional reference
sort of

[edit on 11-8-2010 by Danbones]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:08 PM
reply to post by Jesuswasasailor

And this proves what, exactly?
That he's promoting their agenda, perhaps?

What was he going to say to you?

"lolol I hope no one finds out the troofs lolol shhhh

Come on.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:15 PM
reply to post by Danbones

I'm just a tad fed up with people that refuse to do any critical thinking, and lap up anything and everything that amounts to a "positive" result for the presence of E.T.

Credibility, logic, integrity, intelligence be damned! If it conforms to my belief that E.T is hiding in the bush outside my house it must be accurate and true.

I just can't stand that train of thought. Sure, E.T's out there, but nothing the "starchildproject" will do is going to help us get any closer to finding them. Mark my words.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:18 PM
If it was a mutated human of some kind i would think that there would be more than one found more than likely in the same area. Are there any more recorded instances of this if so where is the data on them?
Alien or not this deserves further study.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:24 PM
However I will add that if they get a real independent lab to run and publish verifiable, peer reviewed results that suggest Starchild could be otherworldly, I'll change my tune.

Did you know almost all "male enhancement" products have been subject to "scientific analyses" that "concludes" you'll gain a few inches?

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:48 PM
I'm not saying I don't believe this, I find it very interesting below I am posting a video which describes possible origins, like planet X in the Orbit Of Nibiru.

Title Of Video : Star Child Skull Compilation by Zecharia Sitchin & Lloyd Pye.

Video Link :

[edit on 11-8-2010 by ShadowRamesses]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:03 PM

Originally posted by Section31
If 'humans' can do this (Elongated Skulls) physicaly to themselves, I think that Progeria Sydnrome is the perfect explanation for the 'human' Starchild skull.

now, how the heck do you make that leap?

i'm seriously asking because that went right over the top of my own skull.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:22 PM
reply to post by Jesuswasasailor

An interesting email you received there. I wish them the best.

I can only relay my thoughts on my sighting of Bigfoot in AK. Ten feet away.

There is tons if evidence, like hair samples after sightings being tested for any related DNA. The results are always "we don't know, we have no comparable DNA to attach it to" therefore it remains undetermined.

So In my opinion, I guess until we capture one and bring it to them, they will never admit to even the possibility of Bigfoot or aliens.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:31 PM
reply to post by SaosinEngaged
[Wow, I was simply trying to enhance and propel this intelligent discussion forward by inquiring as to what, if anything, the response from the "Starchild" camp was in regards to the progeria hypothesis that was being bantered about in this thread. I did this in the spirit of what I believed to be the mantra of Above Top Secret "deny Ignorance" and I get a response to my post from you like that? I was under the impression that there is nothing 100% indicative one way or the other as to how this skull came be.]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:42 PM

Originally posted by Blue Shift
Skull looks like a hydrocephalic baby with that back of its head smushed in as a result of being carried by cradleboard, which was a common way for Native Americans to carry their little babies around.

cradle boarding, and/or binding, affects the surface of the skull - making it smooth and non-bumpy - and the sutures. it depends on how the skull is shaped as to which sutures are affected, but they will be affected because of the mechanical re-shaping of the infant's still-soft skull and open sutures.

this skull has normal neatly closed sutures and has the texture of a "normal" skull, i.e. one that has not been artificially de-formed. and in fact, it appears that the sutures are so perfectly knitted together, and symmetrical, that it isn't at all natural as far as what we are used to - the human cranium and face is never symmetrical. studies have shown that we, as humans, are attracted to the asymmetrical aspect of our features and are consistently NOT attracted to symmetry, at all. in these studies, when shown a symmetrical image of a face, that was made to appear symmetrical by cutting and pasting two right or left sides together, the subject rejected it in favor of the non-symmetrical, non-altered image just about every time if not every time.

even so, cradle boarding cannot account for a few other empirical characteristics of this skull:

the composition of the skull is not like our bone chemistry but more like our teeth, including enamel.

the capacity of the brain is 200cc more than the average adult modern human. that's equivalent to one rung in the evolutionary ladder, according to what we've learned from studying our hominid predecessors.


the unusual alignment of the spine, neck, and foramen magnum - rather than being toward the posterior of the skull, it is pretty much in the center. that's not compatible with the human musculo-skeletal system; from the perspective of body mechanics and engineering, it would not work for many reasons and i can't imagine what the result would be if you or i were built that way, as humans. it might impact all sorts of things besides the ability to stand up straight and walk or even hold your head up when laying down. it might prevent normal respiration and/or GI function such as swallowing and even chewing.

so far, no suggested answer to the origin of this skull has satisfactorily addressed the issue of the spine's alignment with the neck and head!

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:42 PM
Humans and Aliens Might Share DNA Roots

The building blocks of life may be more than merely common in the cosmos. Humans and aliens could share a common genetic foundation.

That’s the tantalizing implication of a pattern found in the formation of amino acids in meteorites, deep-sea hydrothermal vents, and simulations of primordial Earth. The pattern appears to follow basic thermodynamic laws, applicable throughout the known universe.

"This may implicate a universal structure of the first genetic codes anywhere," said astrophysicist Ralph Pudritz of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario.

There are exactly 20 standard amino acids — complex molecules that combine to form proteins, which carry out instructions specified by RNA and DNA, its double-stranded and self-replicating descendant.

Ten were synthesized in the famous 1953 Miller-Urey experiments, which modeled conditions believed to exist in Earth’s early atmosphere and volcano-heated pools. Those 10 amino acids have also been found in meteorites, prompting debate over their role in sparking life on Earth and, perhaps, elsewhere.

DNA isn't an earth-bound phenomenon, after all, according to these scientists.

it isn't out of the realm of possibility, then, that DNA, as a universal code for life, is recombinant throughout the cosmos.

there is so much more that we do NOT know than what we DO know.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:48 PM

Originally posted by spikey
Hmmm...this is the first time i've heard of the 'red fibers' in the starchild soon as i read that, i immediately thought of Morgellons..


Considering absolutely nobody knows what Morgellons is or where it comes from, could this be an indication that Morgellons is actually some kind of ET disease or parasite?

actually, Morgellons is mentioned on the starchild website.

The Morgellons fibers in soft tissue look somewhat like the fibers in the Starchild's bone (see the comparison table below), although a visual comparison to Morgellons fibers found in bone has not yet been possible. There are noted similarities, but at present there is no way to determine if any connection can be made between the Starchild and Morgellons.

but if you are interested, go to the link and read the whole page. it is intriguing, for sure - not only the possible connection but Morgellons in general.


posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:52 PM
reply to post by Tribble
[I thought the email from Mr. Pye was intriguing to say the least and agree with your statement about the issue of what constitutes proof in ones eyes. Congratulations about bigfoot. I envy you.]

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in