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 MrXYZ
Every single independent study by experts show the skull to be 100% human with a genetic disease
really ? there have been independent studies done on it? did they do a complete genome? You're saying the chemical analysis that Lloyd had done is wrong? Who did the one that demonstrably proves the chemical make up is the same as a human? When did all this happen?
p.s.
which genetic disease does the skull show and how was that found?
and NON human nuclear DNA
Originally posted by colin42
Thanks for having a stab at the OP as I am quite bored with reading about a 900 year skull that it appears explains the origins of man?
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Only Pye is CLAIMING that, but he hasn't presented any raw data to confirm it, or allowed peer reviews.
I think the point is that we don't know everything.
Thanks for your post. This is why I try not to put all those with faith in a box labeled wrong.
I also see no conflict with evolution and creation because evolution does not describe creation. It describes the diverity we see in the fossil records and the diversity we see today.
Obviously I do not agree with your views on human evolution but from your post it is obvious we agree with a lot more than we differ.
Thanks for having a stab at the OP as I am quite bored with reading about a 900 year skull that it appears explains the origins of man?
How do you know this? Just because the man tries to sell books does not make him a liar. How do you know he is lying, I want to know. Do you have like an inside connection to lie detection.
That's simply not true. Only Pye is CLAIMING that, but he hasn't presented any raw data to confirm it, or allowed peer reviews. Because of that, he could be claiming giant purple unicorns roam the universe, and it would be just as valid as this nonsense.
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Only Pye is CLAIMING that, but he hasn't presented any raw data to confirm it, or allowed peer reviews.
he's building his case to take to the public as we speak. Earlier no one would touch the skull although a few would speak off the record which was one thing that motivated him. The lack of any matches so far points in the direction of non-terrestrial parents. The normal skeleton's dna was all there with no anomalies.
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
it was the geneticist who suggested it was a full alien with the mitochondria of a third woman
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
I think the point is that we don't know everything.
Thanks for your post. This is why I try not to put all those with faith in a box labeled wrong.
I also see no conflict with evolution and creation because evolution does not describe creation. It describes the diverity we see in the fossil records and the diversity we see today.
Obviously I do not agree with your views on human evolution but from your post it is obvious we agree with a lot more than we differ.
Thanks for having a stab at the OP as I am quite bored with reading about a 900 year skull that it appears explains the origins of man?
And how do you know for sure there is no creator. I find it easier to understand our existance through creation of some type rather than all of us being made from slime.
Unmatched DNA does not mean ALIEN
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by HappyBunny
Your assuming we would have more in common with chimps, which is actually backwards.
There is no false delima here.
Well your welcome to believe its a child just remember it has different bone composite, adult teeth with 5 more adult teeth waiting to come down (which is unheard of)
If you think this was a child, there is no way. How could it have adult teeth? With more waiting to come down? How can you dissmiss all of the aformentioned?
It would have had to of been a really screwed up kid that had all these side effects and still had no visible symetrical oddities, which is impossible. More importantly it would have to have human nuclear DNA which it doesn't. It has human mtDNA and coherent insignificiant base pairs.
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Only Pye is CLAIMING that, but he hasn't presented any raw data to confirm it, or allowed peer reviews.
he's building his case to take to the public as we speak. Earlier no one would touch the skull although a few would speak off the record which was one thing that motivated him. The lack of any matches so far points in the direction of non-terrestrial parents. The normal skeleton's dna was all there with no anomalies.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by bottleslingguy
really ? there have been independent studies done on it? did they do a complete genome? You're saying the chemical analysis that Lloyd had done is wrong? Who did the one that demonstrably proves the chemical make up is the same as a human? When did all this happen?
p.s.
which genetic disease does the skull show and how was that found?
MRxyz... there were never any tests done on the skull that prove it to be 100% alien. There were tests that found human mtDNA and NON human nuclear DNA. The only possible way something like this could happen is if this was labbed as an embryo. The first two tests were only primer tests that checked the mtDNA. We aren't arguing the mtDNA to be human, we know it is, we also know that when the nuclear DNA was done, its not human.