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 itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
Ok, lets not look at pye.
The analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) has been a useful forensic technique since it was first admitted as evidence in a US court in Tennessee v. Wade in 1996. Unlike nuclear DNA, the DNA used for DNA fingerprinting, mtDNA does not match a crime scene sample to a particular individual. That is, it can’t point the finger directly at one person. What it reveals is the maternal lineage of the individual or crime scene sample in question. Often this is all that is necessary to prove that a particular individual was at the crime scene, but it is not the “smoking gun” that nuclear DNA is.
But now some new evidence casts a different light on this test. Before addressing that, let’s look at an excerpt from my book Howdunnit: Forensics so we can understand exactly what mitochondrial DNA is.
writersforensicsblog.wordpress.com...
How could mtdna only represent the mother when it is unable to identify her?
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Varemia
are a horse and donkey the same species?
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
You know it's looking like it could be genesists information that Pye was only privy to because of his dealings with labs. I feel confident enough to trust his explanation on how mtDNA is present in an alien skull. There were matching parts of the skull and those where the mtDNA. The rest of it didn't match.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
I didn't have time to check out the links, I can went I get back from work. Part of the video I watched made me laugh. If we were on such a collision course with death how come our population is growing so much?
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Varemia
are a horse and donkey the same species?
Regarding Pye's claims of "alien" DNA, from what I understand the Starchild had between 800-1,000 mtDNA differences. That's less than that of a chimp, which has roughly 1,500. So, the most you could say, assuming the results hold up if they're for real to begin with, is that the Starchild is not human. You definitely cannot claim it's alien--the Starchild has almost 50% fewer deviations than a chimp.
Saying that the Starchild is alien because it is not human is using the principle of exclusion and a false dilemma.
This is a severely disabled child. Usually, such a child is miscarried but occasionally they can be born alive. (Miscarriage is nature's way of correcting these kinds of mistakes.) They don't usually live very long, however, which could explain why the child was 5 or so at death.
About the "alien" DNA. We don't know what "alien" DNA looks like, so how can he tell one way or the other.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
Well thats pretty hard to understand considering we only procriate for about 20-25 years, which is about 1/4 of our life.
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by HappyBunny
the chemical signature of the bone is not human. the morphology and physiology are not human. if it looks, walks and quacks like an alien then it's an alien.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
I don't think peer reviews alone is what determins what the skull is or isn't.
Oh and his wikipedia page clearly shows his as a NON fiction writer.edit on 17-11-2011 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)
Lloyd Anthony Pye (born 1946)[1] is an American author...
In the late 1990s, Pye obtained a curiously shaped skull from a couple in El Paso, Texas that he believes is an alien-human hybrid and proof that humans are descended from extra-terrestrial beings he calls "terraformers".[7] DNA tests show that the skull is from a human male and Steven Novella believes he suffered from hydrocephalus.[8][9]
What about their confident prediction that DNA testing will prove the child was alien? Well, a 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.
There are gaping logical problems with their hypothesis. First, Amerindian female mtDNA might be “compatible” with an alien-human hybrid, but it is also compatible with every normal Amerindian human in existence. Further, if the Starchild’s mother was an Amerindian female, as the mtDNA shows (and therefore possessed two X chromosomes), and the father of an alleged hybrid would therefore have to be alien, then were did the human Y (male) chromosome come from? Also, as Carl Sagan once pointed out, alien genetic instructions – the product of a completely different evolutionary past, would be incompatible with human DNA. We would have more luck breeding a human with a petunia than an alien.