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.

 

Starchild Skull DNA Testing Proves Not From This Earth

page: 13
10
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by NavalFC
A well as the fact that hydrocephallus explains all of the skulls unique features.

So hydrocephallus can produce uniformly thick skulls that are nearly perfectly symmetrical?

It can produce skulls that are lighter and stronger than normal skulls, with different fibre compositions?

It can produce skulls with larger inner ears and smaller sinuses?

Go ahead, supply me with the link that states that hydrocephallus can account for ALL of the starchild skull's unusual qualities...


If you look at a cross section of humanity, some have seemingly perfect symmetry (the bootifull people!), and others are pretty jacked up. The vast majority of people residing in the middle.
Lighter and stronger? Possibly the bone growths reaction to being stretched thin? Perhaps the other children in village kept hitting his skull with sticks every day!
Supply us with links that say that hydrocephallus can't produce these qualities (starchild and affiliate sites excluded, of course).

PFFFT! You're telling me that this is perfectly symmetrical???

wiki says :


The skull is abnormal in several aspects. A dentist determined, based on examination of the upper right maxilla found with the skull, that it was a child's skull, 4.5 to 5 years in age.[4] However, the volume of the interior of the starchild skull is 1600 cubic centimeters, which is 200 cm³ larger than the average adult's brain, and 400 cm³ larger than an adult of the same approximate size. The orbits are oval and shallow, with the optic nerve canal situated at the bottom of the orbit instead of at the back. There are no frontal sinuses.[3] The back of the skull is flattened, but not by artificial means. The skull consists of calcium hydroxyapatite, the normal material of mammalian bone.[5] Carbon 14 dating was performed twice, the first on the normal human skull at the University of California at Riverside in 1999, and on the Starchild skull in 2004 at Beta Analytic in Miami, the largest radiocarbon dating laboratory in the world. Both independent tests gave a result of 900 years ± 40 years since death. [6] DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD, a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "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".[7] BOLD was unable to extract any DNA from the maxilla.[6] Further DNA testing at Trace Genetics, which unlike BOLD specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, in 2003 recovered mitochondrial DNA though it was not the child of the skull found with it. Its mother did belong to a known Native American haplogroup, haplogroup C. However, useful lengths of nuclear DNA or Y-chromosomal DNA for further testing have not yet been recovered. [8] Later testing in 2004 at the Royal Holloway college of the University of London revealed unexplained "fibers" in the bone of the skull and a reddish residue in the cancellous bone, neither of which are known or recorded to exist prior to the discovery.[9] Explanations from the skull's unusual features include the use of cradle boarding on a hydrocephalic child,[10] brachycephaly, Crouzon syndrome,[11] and progeria.


[edit on 12-12-2008 by cruzion]



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by cruzion
Supply us with links that say that hydrocephallus can't produce these qualities (starchild and affiliate sites excluded, of course).

You really don't know how to argue logically, do you?

If you're making the claim that the skull is a case of hydrocephallus, then YOU have to provide the proof that it is.

I don't have to do anything to prove a negative.

Please, learn logic and support your claim.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 07:41 AM
link   
It reminded me of this passage from Genesis:



6:1-4 Now it came to pass, ​a​when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they ​​took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
3 And the Lord said, ​​“My Spirit shall not ​​strive ​​with man forever, ​​for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were ​​giants on the earth in those ​​days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 10:57 AM
link   
I said at the beginning that it looks like hydrocephaly to me.

However, the assumptions being made about it being IMPOSSILBE to mix humans is wrong.

Of course the DNA would be human X and Y. That's what you would do to make a hybrid. You would use a human Y, a human ovum (mtDNA) and then a labratory created X with mixed DNA.

If that DNA actually took into the population, it would be transparent over time. You would just assume that all DNA that is "modern" is all human. Because chimera X would have been broken up and spread over time into most people.

Perhaps the problem in understanding is that people believe that the X transfers whole into your children. It does not. The Y does, though it mutates over time. The mtDNA comes over whole, though it also mutates over time. The X recombines.

People don't read so good.


Originally posted by NavalFC
Aeons and Mind in the universe your grasping at straws, and Aeons you dont seem to understand what happened

HUMAN X AND HUMAN Y chomosome were both found. That is definitive, it means, beyond a shadow of a doubt that this person was a human male with a human mother and father. Their were no un explained chromosomes

A well as the fact that hydrocephallus explains all of the skulls unique features.

you can post all the news artiles about genetic manipulation you want the fact is their isnt A SINGLE CINTILLA of evidence to suggest that this occured in this case.


Now you 2 are just being silly, refusing to see the evidence....
the same thing proponents often accuse skeptics of! How ironic!


[edit on 2008/12/12 by Aeons]

[edit on 2008/12/12 by Aeons]



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   
content from an external source earthfiles.com
More About Non-Human Brain

AFTER CUTTING THE BEING OPEN AND LIFTING OUT THE VARIOUS ORGANS, DID THE PROCEDURE THEN SWITCH TO THE BRAIN?

Yes. I don’t remember them taking everything out of the being, but they took a lot of organs out of the abdomen area and around it, but it seems like there was something left in there. And then they started on the head. And just above his eyebrows is where they cut his head all the way around and opened up the skull. When they opened the skullcap up, it did not look as thick as our human skulls. Human skulls are pretty thick and it was not that thick. But the skull cap itself when they sat it down on the edge of the table, it could stand by itself and was still a skullcap, so it was thick enough for that.

THEN YOU’RE LOOKING AT THE BRANCHES WITH LOBES THAT WERE MORE OF A GREY COLOR AND NOT BLACK OR DARK IN THE BLACK AND WHITE MOTION PICTURE FILM?

Yes.

WHAT DID THE SURGEONS DO? DID THEY CUT OUT A LOBE OR BRANCHES?

No, they held the opened head toward the camera so you could see the two hemispheres of the brain. But they did not take the brain out of the skull. They left the brain where it was. Then they made another cut down by the ear like they were trying to see the inner ear, maybe in respect to the eye so they could see from the brain to the eye as far as the visual connection in the brain – something like that.

WAS THERE ANY SOUND AT ALL?

No, no sound whatsoever.

SO, SILENT FILM. DO YOU HAVE ANY MEMORY OF THE LAST SCENES ON THE FILM YOU SAW?

It was the scalp being cut off and the surgeons holding up the head so we could see the two brain hemispheres. Then they started cutting by the ear and toward the eye and inspecting with little instruments of some kind, kind of probing through the brain. It looked like they were trying to see how the brain was connected to the eyes and ears. Basically that was the end of the autopsy film we saw.

WAS THE FILM GOING AND THEN JUST STOPPED?

Yeah, the camera kind of zoomed back real fast and was shut off. That was it. There was no wording on the end as far as explaining anything.

AFTER THE FILM RAN OUT OF THE PROJECTOR, WHAT DID ANTHONY BARDEN DO?

He said, ‘Well, this is it. This is the first time I’ve seen this.’

WHAT WAS HIS REACTION TO IT?

He said that he was surprised at the brain and at the internal organs and that the beings were neither male nor female.

He asked me, ‘Stein, how do you think they reproduce?’ And I said, ‘They lay on top of a Xerox machine!’ (laughs)

DID BARDEN EVER HAVE MORE INFORMATION FROM THE CIA OR ANYONE ELSE ABOUT THE 6-FINGERED BEINGS?

No, not a thing.

DID ANY OF THE FILM YOU SAW SHOW ANY OF THE CRAFT, OR PIECES OF CRAFT?

No, nothing about the craft.

WHAT DID BARDEN SAY AFTER THAT? THE FILM WAS SHOWN, THERE ARE 26 MEN. WERE THEY ASKING QUESTIONS?

Yes, they were all asking questions. Since Anthony Barden and the film introduction described them as ‘aliens,’ the audience reaction was, ‘Well, they sure look like us in miniature form.’ One guy in the back of the room said, ‘Wow, the aliens have bigger stomachs than Stein!’ (laughs)

YOU’VE ALWAYS HAD A BIGGER STOMACH?

Yes, a protruding stomach. They used to tease me about that.

WHAT DID ANTHONY BARDEN SAY TO THE GROUP?

He said that the explanation at the front of the film was the only information we had, other than this was sent to our group to view and in two weeks, five of us would be going to Area 51 in Nevada and probably would get further information at that time. Anthony said if that did happen, he would call together the rest of the group after we returned to give further information - unless it’s classified TOP SECRET WHITE HOUSE.

IN THOSE NEXT TWO WEEKS, DID YOU GET TOGETHER WITH ANTHONY BARDEN OVER COFFEE OR A BEER TO TALK WITH HIM?

Yes, a couple of time we got together for lunch. During those two weeks, I was teaching an instructor training class and trying to improve our instructors we had because they were floundering. I was busy at that, but we did meet twice and talked about the fact that I was completely baffled, completely puzzled as to what these beings could be since the information listed them as ‘aliens’ on the paperwork. Anthony Barden told me he hoped we would find out more when we got to Area 51.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by mind is the universe

Originally posted by NavalFC

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by NavalFC
However fermi's paradox also calls into question why they havent colonized the entire galaxy yet

How do you know that 'they' haven't?

Humans have colonised Earth, so at least this particular part in the Galactic rim IS colonised.

You assume so much in your posts, NavalFC, when you really don't know much at all.


No we did not colonize Earth. Earth is our HOME.



You don't know that. It's premature and silly thing to say. We actually don't know that. Darwin's theory is duh a theory.


This is a common misconception. That a theory is just an idea that hasn't been proven.

Let me give you the definition of a Scientific Theory.

In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations.2 It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.



As a species we have only been inhabitating this planet for 100,000 at most. The universe is speculated to be more thatn 15billion years old. Open your mind, your brain isn't going to fall out if you just try and think bigger.

There is an abundance of evidence showing that we evolved on earth and ZERO evidence to suggest otherwise.


In a real sense we are not from earth, life came to earth. So either way your really woefully wrong.

In what way are we not "really from earth" ?


Naval you also need to calm down, your going to do yourself a turn.

I believe IF Naval is frustrated, there is a justifiable reason. Naval's trying to bring scientific reasoning to the table and people are just ignoring it in favor of fairy tales.


But on topic, People should not buy into this starchild nonsenese until there is more evidence. Only in America people Only in America. People will do anything to make money.

Not to be picky but there is NO evidence to suggest anything other then terrestrial origin.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by cruzion
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Glass houses and throwing stones!
What evidence would you like to see?
If you define what it is you really want, maybe we can stop going around in circles.
I doubt that it will matter what evidence we get, it will somehow never be enough.

My ramblings were a floppy, limp and shrivelled pink attempt at satire.
You had come to the conclusion that all the scientists that had ever worked on the problem of abiogenesis and evolution and paelentology and a whole host of other branches of science, were not quite convincing enough. Apparently none of it is proof enough for you.
I took it to the next level where the limitations of the solipsist nature of our conciousness - the subjective interpretation of an external world, was a limiting factor in proving anything definitively.
Kind of silly I know, but then, so is dismissing the work of thousands of people who have put time and hard work into trying solve these problems.


Good luck with getting him to tell you what evidence he requires. I already tried and he ignored that. In my opinion, that means he's not looking for answers but is only looking to wind up people in threads for his own amusement.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
This thread is incredible. The aliens would be so impressed if they came down and saw effortlessly we reject the scientific method, or in fact any attempts at critical reasoning. I love the whole 'ok so the hybridisation idea is almost entirely impossible, but not quite, so i'll treat it as a fact' attitude. It's almost entirely impossible, but not proven impossible, that your bed is going to turn into a monster and eat you at night - you going to sleep on the floor?

There is little, or nothing that can be proven beyond all doubt. This is why we reason, and reject ideas that are completely #ing ridiculous. I find it hard to believe that you people are really so stupid as to be unable to weigh this situation up; you're just desperate to believe this crock of #. Do you really believe this low rent operation is going to say 'hey, we failed to extract the father's DNA, maybe we can do the next best thing and get a medical expert to suggest any number of congenital conditions that could produce this result. Then you guys could stop throwing good money after bad into our bull# operation.' Let's be honest, even if they had found human DNA from the father, would they really drop this sweet little earner in order to tell the truth to a bunch of gullible #wits who'd rather be lied to anyway?

On top of this, have they actually presented any evidence to back up this claim that this skull is super strong? This whole set up is so fishy it makes my nose burn.

And by the way, is it any wonder that naval keeps repeating himself when you guys repeatedly fail to absorb his simple and sensible suggestions into your thick (and doubtless super-strong) skulls?



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by melaena
 


It makes sense that you claim that we can't take this "scientist" word on the different aspects of the skull. But from your own argument how can we take his word that the mDNA is actually that of a human female. or anything else they say. Basically your entire argument is they guy must be lying to make money because NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE can be presented for either argument.

I like how pseudo-skeptics arguments usually boil down to someone is lying

In the last few pages of this thread aeons is the only one who has brought forth a constructive argument from what is presented that again NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE can be presented for either argument. He seems to be the only true skeptic in this topic because he has presented his opinion of what it is most likely but still brings forth counter arguments for other possibilities.

When you don't know anything. Everything is in the realm of possibilities.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


and tezz we have provided more then ample evidence that this is a human hydrocephallic skull



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


No Aeon, if this was a hybrid it would not have both the X and Y. From your post it seems as if you dont quite understand how the whole X Y thing works and what exactly it means..


the fact that the X and Y were found means it this child had the whole compliment of human DNA, from the father and mother.

If this were a "Hybrid" this would not be the case.
you dont just get a X and Y chromosome and throw them together in a lab to make a hybrid.. doesnt work that way.

each person in human redproduction contributes 23 chromosomes for a grand total of 46 out of the 23 pairs

Also the fact that as I have said there is nothing about the skull, or the biological testing thats been done, that suggests in anyway that this is anything other then a human skull.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 08:28 PM
link   
That is exactly what a hybrid is. You saying it isn't with lots of scorn isn't the strongest argument, when I've actually given you pictures of real hybrid mammals that are part human using exactly the technic I described.

I mean, really it is very normal argument. I'm sure that many people find it terribly convincing. Merely because they don't understand any of the stuff I posted, and therefore having someone who is scornfully to mentally buddy up to is very reassuring.

The process used to make the human-sheep hybrid is the process I described. Only in the case of an alien-human hybrid in a time when humans were far less technologically advanced, WE are the sheep and they are people with the lab and pipettes.

One sheep ovum, cleared of nuclear DNA.
Take one sheep Y.
Take one sheep X and recombine it with human nuclear DNA.
Insert the Y, and the recombined sheep-human X into the empty sheep ovum.
And you get this.
Sheep-Human Hybrid

Now replace sheep with human and human with alien. That is how you get an alien human hybrid.

The X is a sheep X, and the Y is a sheep Y. It has to be. It's a sheep. But it's organs are still part human.


Here's a nice little example of a mouse-human-sheep hybrid. You know, the sort of thing that again, cannot exist.

Mouse-Human-Sheep Hybird


Originally posted by NavalFC
reply to post by Aeons
 


No Aeon, if this was a hybrid it would not have both the X and Y. From your post it seems as if you dont quite understand how the whole X Y thing works and what exactly it means..


the fact that the X and Y were found means it this child had the whole compliment of human DNA, from the father and mother.

If this were a "Hybrid" this would not be the case.
you dont just get a X and Y chromosome and throw them together in a lab to make a hybrid.. doesnt work that way.

each person in human redproduction contributes 23 chromosomes for a grand total of 46 out of the 23 pairs

Also the fact that as I have said there is nothing about the skull, or the biological testing thats been done, that suggests in anyway that this is anything other then a human skull.



I'm sure it is a hydrocephelic skull. That doesn't mean that hybridization is IMPOSSIBLE. Unlikely. Unlikely and impossible are not the same thing.

[edit on 2008/12/12 by Aeons]



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Occam's Razor is awesome. Of course, you're abusing it when you use it as a presumption and assumption in itself to stop any further idea or thought.

[edit on 2008/12/12 by Aeons]



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 10:13 PM
link   
I'm seeing a lot of people talk about how the lack of evidence doesn't mean anything, but I don't think anyone's getting the picture. According to multiple sources (Sitchen and Daniken being two) the ancient Sumerians wrote about the mating of human women with "alien" Annunaki males. This was after the Annunaki merged thier "life's water" with an early female from earth. Recent DNA research has shown that the human Genome can be traced back to a "Genetic" Adam and Eve, both being about 200,000 years old which coincides with the Sumerian texts. Now, if we cannot match the male DNA sequence to this skull then I believe what the researcher was commenting on was that with a LACK of evidence on the male side, the previous writings that make that very same claim (that the mother is from earth and the rest of the DNA was from the Annunaki that had been engineered to "reverse" their advanced state).
Remember people, if you're going to disagree with something, use evidence and reasoning. If not, go join a church. They love thoughtless and opinionated obedience.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Mozzy
 


Don't think an unknown race of humans is as likely as an unknown race of aliens. What's outside this planet is indescribably more than what is available here. Still, the fact that they couldn't extract DNA from the nucleus doesn't even tell me that it's not human. The only thing that the scientist looking fellow said is that they don't know. And that was proof.

Wanting any sort of result tends to skew observations. It's not proof. Describe that nuclear DNA for me, then we'll talk.



posted on Dec, 13 2008 @ 04:31 AM
link   
but really, either way you splice it guys.... it's CLEARLY nothing of the norm...
the size and shape merits a good old fashioned ?*hmmmmmmmm*?


the lack of DNA evidence DOESN'T mean it's from "outta this world"
but it doesn't mean that it HAS to be from this earth...

looking @ it..... if I was in Vegas I'd let my $$$ ride that it's not local



posted on Dec, 13 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Allegory of Illumination
 




alllegory, Incase you havent been keeping up with the thread mtDNA was found
as well as the presence of human X and human Y chromosomes meaning it was a human male child,
as a X / Y combo could only come from a human set of parents.



posted on Dec, 13 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Im not abusing it, YOU are Aeon, instead of accepting the scientific and natural explanation you are now trying to come up with some explanantion to justidy continuing ti believe this is some sort of alien WHE NONE OF THE EVIDENCE WHATS SO EVER POINTS TO IT. and even in your so called chimeras, which alot of is just bull crap anyway
(human /mouse hybrid? Lies)
but the point is their is nothing suggesting this took place, NOTHING, and plenty of evidence suggesting this was just a human male child with hydrocephallus.
nothing at all suggests to the contrary but you and a select few others seem to ignore all this and favor upon your deluded belief of alien hybridization.

So no, I am not abusing Occams razor, you are.



[edit on 13-12-2008 by NavalFC]



posted on Dec, 13 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Nah. Occam's Razor is the Law of Parsity. Not the Law of Rejection Based on Not Wanting to Look. It is the acceptance of the LEAST argument, not suppression of arguments to the least number.

There is a difference between simplest and just being simple.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join