It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Truth Behind The Crystal Skulls

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:11 AM
I have just watched a great documentary by Nat Geo called "The Truth Behind The Crystal Skulls" that does an in depth investigation into the Mitchell Hedges "skull of doom". I cant link anyone to the documentary as its not on youtube but you can see the trailer Here. Ill outline some of the tests they did for the program.

Anna Hedges claimed that she found the skull buried under a collapsed altar inside a temple in Lubaantun, in British Honduras, now Belize in 1924.

One of the claims at the Mitchell Hedges website is that its impossible to replicate even with modern machinery. So Nat Geo contracted Barry Liu owner of Skullis to have a go at making an exact replica.

He managed to make an exact replica in 8 days.

Next Dr John Morris at Institute of Archeology, Belize had a look at the skull and came to the conclusion that it had no similarities with myan art and that it didnt look like any other skull found in that part of the world in pre-Columbian times.

Next forensic artist Gloria Nusse had a look at the skull and cam to the conclusion that it must have been made from a reference human skull as it was so accurate. She then made a cast of the replica skull and set about making a facial reconstruction to see if the had ancient American features.

The face turned out to be female and was clearly European so it cant have been created by ancient Americans 3600 years ago as its claimed.

Dr John Morris explains that in attempt to find where Anna mitchell-hedges claimed to have found the skull in 1927 they re-mapped the site but they couldnt find any of the tunnels or passages she described.

Norman Hammond (academic and Mesoamericanist scholar) says that Anna Mitchell-Hedges wasn't even on the expedition in 1927 as she is not mentioned in any of the official logs or journals. There was also no record in anyones journals of the skull having being found at the time they say it was..

So where did the "Skull of Doom" come from?

It seems that Mitchell-Hedges bought it at an auction from Sotheby's ,Burney , UK in 1944, many years after the expedition to the temple in Lubaantun. A copy of the Sotheby's catalog has been discovered.

This would explain why the skull was European. There are many more claims as to why the skull is fake in the documentary and the Wiki page on crystal skulls so you can make up your own mind but for me its pretty clear that Mitchell-Hedges and his daughter Anna Mitchell-Hedges have been caught out as hoaxers.

edit on 22-11-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-11-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/22/2011 by 12m8keall2c because: fixed image link

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:24 AM
Very intresting I never really looked into it much. S&F

It would to good to find out if it could be replicated by hand and not by machine. I know they cannot carbon date crystal yet.

But there is not just one crystal skull is there ? you mention Skulls in the title and we have only one example above . Here are some others.

The "British" Crystal Skull Asingle piece clear quartz skull, held in the British Museum of Man, in London, England since 1898, purportedly found or bought by a soldier of fortune in Mexico in the late 1890's. This skull is more cloudy than the Mitchell-Hedges and has an elongated back of the head. The quartz comprising this skull is very clear and there is a tool mark found on this skull. OLD

And another

The "Amethyst" Crystal Skull A single piece of amethyst crystal discovered in a Mayan cache of artifacts in Mexico by a Mayan Brotherhood in the early 1900's. This crystal skull is in California and is for sale. The distinctive features are the circular indentations in the temple and a white squiggly line that goes the circumference of the skull ( Editor's Note: This was the first ancient crystal skull that I experienced in person.... ). ANCIENT

And many more
edit on 22-11-2011 by judus because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:38 AM
reply to post by judus

Hi judus , the title i used was the title of the documentary.

It would to good to find out if it could be replicated by hand and not by machine.

One of the tests they did in the documentary was to examine microscopic images of the Mitchell-Hedges skull and they concluded it was to smooth to have been made by hand. It had to have been made with modern machinery and using modern polishing techniques that were around at the time it was presented as a 'discovery'.

I know they cannot carbon date crystal yet.

Yes there is no way to carbon date when a carving or sculpture was made.

edit on 22-11-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:51 AM

I never looked at this show because I blindly assumed it would be highly speculative. You have shown me they truelly try to get to the truth, unlike that other highly speculative show Ancient Aliens.

Kudos National Geograhic I'll definately be checking this series out.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:53 AM
reply to post by PhoenixOD

Nice thread, OP. Interesting topic.

Will comment more later when time allows but just want to say the Nat Geo documentary is on youtube, but under the title "Crystal Skull The Truth". Here's part one. I'll leave it to you to embed the others.
(Same user has all parts on their channel.)

(Warning: it's pretty loud so you might want to turn it down.

Best regards,


posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:54 AM
Nice work
I think too often people consider that some of these older stories have to be legit just because they're old, but as long as man has walked the earth there have been charlatans, hoaxers and flim-flam artists. This is an excellent example of how modern technology can be used to expose hoaxes even when they're nearly a century old.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 08:03 AM
By viewing some of the evidence in he OP I do think that this one may be a hoax. people will always try to profit from the unknow in some way.

But looking at some of the evidence regarding some of the other skulls found it seems that some of them may be real and unexplained.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 08:42 AM
I kept wondering why they would only focus on debunking 1 skull, while there were 12 others... Anyway, the skull was successfully replicated using modern machinery, but NatGeo doesn't go into how the original skull might have been made. Also- Anna and her father clearly did not "discover" the skull - so who did? Methinks there is still some mystery left.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 08:51 AM

I don't have a problem with the idea of this, or any other of the crystal skulls being hoaxes. But at the same time, as has been said before on ATS, just because we can replicate something, doesn't make the original a fake. And just because the face didn't come out indian doesn't make it fake either.

My point is, NatGeo is no less questionable to me than any other source of info. They're just as capable of twisting the facts to suit them as anyone else is. Maybe more so, because they are a mainstream outlet for this kind of info. However, having said that...

In this case, because of the supporting info, I lean toward their findings being legit. But I would like to hear some rebuttal from the other side. If they have any.
edit on 11/22/2011 by Klassified because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 09:05 AM
The Wiki page on crystal skulls is very interesting:

British Museum skull

The British Museum catalogues the skull's provenance as "probably European, 19th century AD" and describes it as "not an authentic pre-Columbian artefact". It has been established that this skull was made with modern tools, and that it is not authentic.

Paris Skull

n 2009 the C2RMF researchers published results of further investigations to establish when the Paris skull had been carved. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis indicated the use of lapidary machine tools in its carving. The results of a new dating technique known as quartz hydration dating (QHD) demonstrated that the Paris skull had been carved later than a reference quartz specimen artifact, known to have been cut in 1740. The researchers conclude that the SEM and QHD results combined with the skull's known provenance indicate it was carved in the 18th or 19th century.

Smithsonian Skull

The "Smithsonian Skull", which is Catalogue No. A562841-0 in the collections of the Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, was mailed to the Smithsonian Institution anonymously in 1992, and was claimed to be an Aztec object by its donor and was purportedly from the collection of Porfirio Diaz. It is the largest of the skulls, weighing 31 pounds (14 kg) and is 15 inches (38 cm) high. It was carved using carborundum, a modern abrasive. It has been displayed as a fake at the National Museum of Natural History.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 09:37 AM
Having seen the episode, it's left me utterly confused
The only conclusions I can take from it is we are capable of replicate it at this time, but the replica is not nearly as perfect as the original under a magnifying glass.

I don't see what they try to prove by putting electrodes on a replica, or shining a laser through it to find holograms, that is just rediculous. I hope they aren't despirately trying to unprove something just like Ancient Aliens is deperately trying to prove something.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 01:14 PM
reply to post by Oscillator

Some of the tests did seem a bit far out but then again they are responding to really wacky claims that people have made about the skull over the years. Like the claim that quartz is just a gateway to other dimensions and can hold information like a computer.

edit on 22-11-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 01:26 PM
NatGeo believes that 19 arabs with boxcutters brought down three skyscrapers in '01, so anything they say about the crystal skulls is suspect. All they are is a propoganda mouthpiece.
edit on 22-11-2011 by dillweed because: spelling

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 02:14 PM
i love natgeo for disinfo^^

heres the newest skull - found in the remainings of joseph goebbels:

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 03:20 PM
Well that may be the truth behind THAT skull.

But there are real Crystal Skulls out there that can't be explained.

There was a great Coast to Coast show on the Skulls not too long ago. Anyone with Coast Insider should check it out.

Other than that, Great post, thanks for the info!

Always nice to weed out the fakes.

PS: not saying that i 100% buy the NatGeo Documentary, but it offered up a few things that were interesting!
edit on 22-11-2011 by dannotz because: PS

edit on 22-11-2011 by dannotz because: spelling

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:04 PM
You're so wrong about Mitchell-Hedges Skull.

You've posted an image - Anna Mitchell-Hedges and the Skull. Stop and look at the image with a clear mind.

Just look at the skull but not as a skull, as an Hologram. Clue - The front and the back ...One of the things you'll see is who made it.

It also tells you where it was made ... but that is asking you too much.

All the best.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:24 PM
reply to post by Lastone

Please post a link to the exact picture you are speaking of. I would like to have a go at what you suggest.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:28 PM
People keep saying that this documentary only describes the Mitchell-Hedges skull, but for years now that is the skull that has been held up as the best example of the Crystal Skulls. It has long been claimed to be flawless and that it could not possibly be manufactured in anyway. In fact in many discussions about the skulls people will state that the other skulls may be fake, but the Mitchell-Hedges skull is definitely legitimate. Not to mention that none of these other skulls emerged until the Mitchell-Hedges skull was pretty much a worldwide celebrity. I think it's safe to say that if the Mitchell-Hedges skull is a fake so are the others. This claim is supported by the fact that none of the skulls are consistent with Mayan iconography, nor are they mentioned in any Mayan texts or monuments.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:29 PM
reply to post by ThatGuy45

OP Last Image. Anna Mitchell-Hedges and the Skull.

posted on Nov, 22 2011 @ 07:33 PM
I don't think the skull resembling a female European skull denounces its age at all. We're still scratching the surface of ancient cultures that traveled the world. There are reports the egyptians may have had trade with south american cultures, and we all know the vikings and other earlier european tribes we're sailing & sculling around in their boats and even found their way to the Americas. The skull may have been a gift to a tribal king.
Science is often handicapped by its search for evidence but in doing this they often times forget to look at story and context of evidence, which is just as important.

Good information in the OP though, whether the evidence is all there or not.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in