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.
Originally posted by benjoepen
I've been following this since it all began and have been in contact with Lloyd for literally years now..
4.Second results came back with the mothers DNA showing human and the fathers not being found. Considering the age of the skull and degradation of the sample the skull was put forward for a more accurate and powerful DNA testing processes.
Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
Originally posted by benjoepen
I've been following this since it all began and have been in contact with Lloyd for literally years now..
4.Second results came back with the mothers DNA showing human and the fathers not being found. Considering the age of the skull and degradation of the sample the skull was put forward for a more accurate and powerful DNA testing processes.
Point of fact: it was the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) that showed as 100% human - this doesn't mean necessarily that the biological (genetic) mother was indeed human.
Here's why: Take a donor egg from woman A and remove its nucleus, replace its nucleus with the nucleus from a fertilized egg from woman B + man C, then implant the egg back in woman A; the mtDNA will show up as being from Woman A, but the Nuclear DNA will only show up as being from woman B and man C; the baby's traits such as hair and eye color will only be inherited from its biological parents, woman B and man C.
It is the Nuclear DNA (found in the nucleus of a fertilized egg) that determines a being's form - hair color, eye color et cetera.
mtDNA is not found in the nucleus of an egg, but instead is found in mitochondria; it does not contribute to the form of an organism, but enables the developing cells to process food energy into a form the cells can use.
The short sequence of Nuclear DNA that Pye has results for, apparently are completely non-human in origin, or at least nothing the NIH databases could identify as human.
The real answers will come with a complete genome sequencing of the "Starchild's" Nuclear DNA
Edit spelling
[edit on 13-8-2010 by mydarkpassenger]
Originally posted by SaosinEngaged
The bottom line, as I see it, is claiming this skull to be an "alien human hybrid" is both dishonest and unscientific.
Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by skeptic_al
DCDC's "sources" are among the most reliable in science:
YouTube, and Lloyd Pie.
What a crock!
I believe that intelligence permeates the Universe. It just doesn't always show up here very much anymore.
When can we get "junk science," "fraud" or "hoax" or "fool" filters for this kind of "scientific analysis?"
deny ignorance
jw
Originally posted by lewtra
Nice video Dave,thanks.No one can argue with DNA,it trumps nature.Looking forward to the final results.Very interesting.
Originally posted by benjoepen
reply to post by mydarkpassenger
Sorry yes I missed the detail out of the mtDNA part.
Do we know how long the full sequencing would take for this?
because you could say there is no such thing as alien! everything comes from the universe an i mean everything!