NEW! Starchild Skull DNA Result..

page: 3
161
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE
 


DCDAVECLARKE.....

There is already a current thread about this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is in addition to the several extensive threads about this topic, some of which are relatively recent.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE
 


DCDAVECLARKE.....

This skull is a case of Progeria Sydnrome, as per my extensive commentary in both the Aliens & UFOs Forum & the Medical Forum.

Progeria Syndrome is extremely rare.

Here is a picture of a little fellow called Ashley, who has the condition:



Here is a video of Ashley:



If you review Progeria Syndrome in detail, you will find that all aspects of the "Starchild Skull" can be explained by Progeria Syndrome.

Amongst other points of discussion, I note the oft mentioned.....

- Lack of frontal sinuses

- Abnormal bone composition

- Large, shallow orbits

.....which are consistent with Progeria Syndrome.

Here is some more info about Progeria Syndrome.

www.progeriaresearch.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 10-8-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
sigh.... and they told Benjamin Frankline he was nuts for running a kite through a lightning storm, and told Alessandro Volta he was even MORE nuts for thinking he could harness it.... later we call these men geniuses...

Continue the research.

You people won't be satisfied until an alien civilization comes down and asks for the skull back. They probably think it was an abomination to mate with beasts like humans.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Furthermore, and to the contrary, I appreciate your input on the Progeria Syndrome, and although in theory, this skull is believed to be the skull of a mixed-DNA infant:

Progeria Syndrome, or an ancient version of it, could have been what affected the so called "Star Child". The only real way to test that would be to collect DNA from a Progeria Syndrome patient, but then again, we would already know that the X and Y's both came from humans.

In the Star Child case... either the X's or Y's are not making sense from a human-to-human interaction. Thus lies the mystery.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Yes we already know that,but this thread is more constructive and interesting..Dont you think.
Sorry about the off topic post.

Us folks in middle England speak our minds that's why i dont post much..




[edit on 10/8/2010 by lewtra]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


Because he said there is nothing else like this on the planet that they have found. They don’t even know what the red stuff is where the bone marrow should be. The bone is not polished and white it’s not acting like anything ever seen. That doesn’t freak you out?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by lewtra
 


Yea, that was interesting... but maybe it really was just dropped on a carpet... haha. No, im joking of course, that was curious.

For me i think there are a few key issues concerning the DNA (origin) of the skull.

1. Regardless of its origins, Earth or elsewhere, what are the implications of finding evidence for genetic manipulation of our species by an alien species... Possibly the dawn of a new age of conspiracy? An Epic Galaxy-wide conspiracy to manipulate all intelligent life forms through genetic engineering, so that the species behind all this would forever remain the most advanced in the galaxy??..
...

this is fun
.

2. Can geneticists possibly discern whether or not something is Alien at all? What i mean by this is, we know already the skull contains Human DNA: Fact. However, can it be logically assumed that the rest of the DNA, not previously recognised as human, is Not simply due to some extremely rare mutation?

3. What actually is that red stuff?

4. The fact that the analysis has shown this skull was from an adult means it survived without being killed by the Humans who clearly accepted it into their community.. if it hadn't already been born into it. Otherwise, without knowledge of the many essential resources needed to survive on this planet (food, water etc), and the knowledge of the many hazards that come with living here, this star child wouldn't have survived beyond infancy... unless of course the alien genetics was advanced enough for them to have been able to determine what humans consume in order to maintain good health and survive, but would that have been necessary anyway? would this star child still the the digestive system of its alien ancestors? or ours? Either way this simply doesn't add up. If it was born here, which has been proven to be a fact due to evidence of human DNA within the skull, then How is it possible for the alien species who came here to sustain themselves, let alone their cute little hybrid star child... oh wait sorry, they must've flown back home once a week right?.. to restock their supplies.... which could also explain how litte Star would have survived if its digestive system was not as human as the many many human like features of its skull. But even it the humans had cared for it, despite knowing its unearthly origins, surely being only 900 years ago, we would have records of this benevolent hospitality shown by the people who cared for this "star-child". But we have nothing. No written records, no rock paintings, no statues, no monuments, nothing at all.. So what happend, unless someone wants to tell me that humanity simply saw the arrival of an alien species from one of our own as something entirely unremarkable and the whole event was completely unrecorded. And please dont tell me becaause it was 900 years ago that these records may have dissapeared.. wouldnt you think that if an alien had lived on this planet, no matter what age in history, the story would have at least become part of some folk-tale, or legend?

I personally don't need to wait for the DNA results to be confident in my beleif that this is not of alien origin. logic can tell us how ridiculous this is, beyond our desire for it to be true.



Good luck dreamers... oh wait..
DizzyDayDream



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by DizzyDayDream
 


I never said it was Alien.I just find it interesting and I'm sure you do.I gave you a star for your responce.Thanks



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


It was an atomic element not found on Earth, yet residing in the junk DNA, that could not be identified as earthly, or found in any significant quantity on earth to account for or explain their inclusion in the strand.

Sorry but I can't offer any more info since the HGP site where I discovered this extraordinary inference has since been dismantled and reorganized.

Sterilized.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
If it is proof then why are these results "preliminary"?

I'll wait for final results before calling anything proof.

I;ve followed the starchild skull case for a long time now.

A few more weeks for definitive results is worth waiting for.

Yet, this is incredible news.

S&F DCDAVE


The phrase "preliminary results" in science doesn't necessarily mean something negative, or the conclusion is premature.

Usually, when the phrase "preliminary results" is used it means that there is further testing going on or "more to come", e.g., more questions are being "tested", more data is being analyzed, the data has yet to be confirmed by another lab, or usually the results have yet to be published.

Basically, a geneticist posting this claim should have more than enough evidence to make/back this conclusion, even though the paperwork that makes it official might still be in the shuffle-dance. And if they don't have said evidence, and this is all just a bunch of inductive-reasoning-garbage, they should be working at a Mcdonalds and not a multi-million dollar facility because that is not science.

Furthermore, just because the genetic base pairs aren't identifiable through the record database doesn't mean they are "out of this world". DNA sequencing is still so new there are still new base pairs being discovered.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by thepainweaver]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


Who says they don't have DNA to compare it to? if you believe in extraterrestrial beings than maybe you believe in Roswell? and other incidents, where conspirators say there were aliens.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue Shift
Let me begin the debunking by asking just how anyone can determine that a particular bit of DNA is "alien," as opposed to simply mutated or damaged? Seeing as how we don't have any alien DNA strands to compare it to.

BOOM!


Thats why they were using the NIH datanbase for there work. We already know what "humans" are supposed to have, from base pairs etc etc. Finding something that does not fit the norm will always be "alien" (foriegn but not neccisarily from Mr. Spock).

Could it be a disease we dont know about? possible but unlikely based on the anlysis.

Keep in mind we are still exploring our own DNA and how it works. The general theory is we have genes that are not activated (longevity, telepathy etc, depending on which theory you read about).

No matter the outcome, this is still an intresting chapter that is being written about life as we know it.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by thepainweaver

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
If it is proof then why are these results "preliminary"?

I'll wait for final results before calling anything proof.

I;ve followed the starchild skull case for a long time now.

A few more weeks for definitive results is worth waiting for.

Yet, this is incredible news.

S&F DCDAVE


The phrase "preliminary results" in science doesn't necessarily mean something negative, or the conclusion is premature.

Usually, when the phrase "preliminary results" is used it means that there is further testing going on or "more to come", e.g., more questions are being "tested", more data is being analyzed, the data has yet to be confirmed by another lab, or usually the results have yet to be published.

Basically, a geneticist posting this claim should have more than enough evidence to make/back this conclusion, even though the paperwork that makes it official might still be in the shuffle-dance. And if they don't have said evidence, and this is all just a bunch of inductive-reasoning-garbage, they should be working at a Mcdonalds and not a multi-million dollar facility because that is not science.


What I got from the guy doing all this is "preliminary" because of the conclusion being so bizarre. Its repeatable, and he is challenging people to do this knowing they will come to the same conclusion. Trying to convice main stream science of something they dont want to subscribe to is a challenge. Until these main stream scientists take the challenge and arrive at the same conslusion, they will always go with preliminary.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Out of curioisty has any DNA alaysis been done on this type of anomoly and if so are the results the same as the starchild? While it very well could be what you have described, looks are sometimes deceiving.

In this case the DNA alanysis is showing something we have never seen before.



[edit on 10-8-2010 by Xcathdra]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Well I hope they concoct a DNA soup and make another sar child that would be some un deniable evidence
Now if we can just find some women to step up to the challenge of having an alien baby



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ziggyproductions05
 


I know a few on ATS that will discredit this. They despise alien knowledge and existence.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
This would also prove bob lazar and his predictions of aliens and how the government stole them. Also the fact that we were altered 56 times according to him.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   
I don't understand why people believe this is an alien / human hybrid? Granted I don't know everything about this case am I am glad to see someone trying to conduct DNA testing but other than the skull simply looking strange are there any other reasons that this would be considered alien? Where there alien pictures or artifacts found inside the cave where the skull was found? ET writings? Any evidence that would point to an alien civilization living in that cave? I get that the skull looks somewhat like a gray alien but as other posters have already pointed out there are numerous ways that a human skull can end up looking exactly the same way. So, why the automatic leap to an alien conclusion?

[edit on 10-8-2010 by zerotime]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE
 


The DNA was tested before and found to be human. A human being, as far as we know, can only reproduce with another human being. To suggest that an intelligent organism that evolved in a separate bio-sphere could reproduce with a human woman is absurd. A truly alien organism might not even have DNA as we know it.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I wouldn't be surprised if there has been cross breeding, between the human species and outsiders such as alien. Perhaps this had something to do with the different races on Earth.
According to ancient writings cross breeding did take place in the past with some rather nasty results due to incompatibilities.
The cross breeding my have been artificially induced or performed in some ET's trying to interbreed or produce hybrids ???
At this stage I will keep an open mind and see what comes out of the findings.





new topics
top topics
 
161
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join