|
Page 1 of 4 pages 1 2 3 > Last › |
Captain Al
|
Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2004 | 11:55 PM
The following is a direct quote from Lloyd Pye, one of the "researchers" on the project:
"To the best of my knowledge, the top lab in the world for what we need done is the Kureha Special Laboratory in Iwaki, Fukushima Prefecture. That's about 200 kilometers northeast of Tokyo. What I need to determine is whether or not we can trust the results of any analysis we get from them. This was no different during the long struggle to find the proper DNA lab. Just because a lab exists, that doesn't mean we can trust any result they give us. If one person working on the analysis has a private agenda that is strongly antithetical to what we're trying to accomplish, we're toast. Such tests are too easy to sabotage. We might as well not even try it."
-Lloyd Pye
In other words, they will only believe the results if it agrees with their pre-determined conclusion.
|
Brenda Layland
|
Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 | 06:09 PM
I've just seen the pics of the "Starchild" skull. It looks like a typical skull-pressing. Very common in pre-columbian Mexcio. |
Maegan
|
Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2004 | 01:44 PM
So the poor kid had a big head...I really feel worse for the mother. 10cms was NOT enough.
I couldn't tell according to the info I've read, but do they know how old the skulls themselves are? Has anyone gone back to the original site to verify the original discoverer's story? Maybe if they had the skeleton they'd be able to determine more. |
lab owner
|
Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 | 08:50 AM
After very brief 'starchild' research, I've concluded that Lloyd Pye is accepting donations to pay for dna examinations while the fact is, almost any dna researcher who runs their own lab would be willing to conduct these tests for free. I can't imagine someone charging any kind of fee for dna testing on a skull believed to be alien or partially alien! Weather or not this skull is actually alien in origin, this guy is making a furtune! |
Captain Al
in Vancouver Island, Canada
Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 | 03:33 PM
Lab Owner,
Welcome to the world of pseudoscience. Their motto:
"Never let common sense and contrary evidence get in the way of perpetuating a myth (especially if you can make money with it!)." |
healthyskepticism
|
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 | 02:46 AM
Listen to the arguments regarding the symmetry of the deformity and how the backbone of the child attached to the skull to balance the extra brain capacity (1/3 larger capacity than human). Deformity is never symetrical in nature. As for looking at pictures of it, we have eye sockets that go into our sinus cavities. Big empty black holes behind our eyes. This does not have that. They are shallow and do not go back into a sinus cavity like a human. The knitting of the bone is indicitive of someone with non existent or next to no jaw muscles for chewing. According to analysis by a craneofacial surgeon.
As for junk science, isn't it junk science to debunk something before even looking at the evidence? How can you have a skeptical discussion of something that you are not even reading the information on? No reputable members of the medical community want their names attached to the idea of a possible extra terrestrial or hybrid skull. You make it sound like DNA labs would be anxious to go to the expense of running the tests. It took finding a craneo facial surgeon in Vancouver Canada to finally do a cursory analysis. All he states is that the shape of the skull is not consistent with what nature defines as deformity. Deformity is ASSYMETRICAL. And the knitting of the bones on the side of the jaw and the small mouth means that this thing probably was not a big chewer. In some ways the skull is an improvement in form and function over a human skull. Although granted not esthetically.
The bone is stronger than human bone yet is half as dense. Etc. microscopic cabling or threads in the bone that are hard to cut through. There are a lot of interesting facts surrounding the case. The mitochondrial/nuclear/paternal DNA will be extractable once the protocols for extraction are completed next yr on the project involving neadrethal man which they are currently incable of extracting DNA from bone samples that old. The current skull is only a few hundred yrs old and was discovered in a cave with the skeleton of an adult holding the child. No doubt someone will make the dumb joke about them being ostracized for having a butt ugly kid.
There's skeptical. And then there's gullible. Open mindedness is supposedly a balance between the two. Since no one has discussed any of the relevant facts surrounding the case I will assume that this is the Church of Hardline Skeptics. What does a Incan boarding have to do with this skull? Are you sure you even looked at the same pictures??? This has more skull than a normal human skull whereas skulls that went through boarding have less capacity and slope INWARD. Not bulging craniums. 30% more space inside the skull is a LOT more brain capacity. Read some of the text at the guy's websites. Not just look at the pretty pics. Or if reading is a problem listen to some of the video interviews online. |
healthyskepticism
|
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 | 02:46 AM
I'm not sure what I believe but some of the comments or lack thereof in this thread show ignorance or a desire to argue for the sake of it and not for the sake of discovering truth. Is this a contest to see who can make the most sarcastic comment without knowing anything about what the comment is about? That's not skepticism. You are doing nothing to promote your point of view other than saying you believe it's not possible in which case no amount of evidence will matter.
As far as making money goes, this guy isn't PT Barnum or Ripley's with a sideshow business. And books of this nature very rarely make their money in return over publishing costs if they even do that. This whole topic is too far out in left field and unbelievable to be successful enough to earn a living off of.
Some people genuinely believe in their convictions enough that it becomes a part of their life. Just as some disbelievers follow the same strong convictions that might alter the equilibrium of their current belief system. Quite honestly I'm surprised that he is hesitating on getting the DNA analysis done. Everything I have read or heard of the guy over the yrs gave me the impression that he was too trusting in the average person. For instance he sounded surprised when National Geographic did a butcher job last yr and included a very short segment on the artifact (a couple of mins of the entire show) and included none of the details and painted him out to be a fringe believer in Ancient Astronaut theory.
Like I said I don't know what I believe but I do believe the guy has a sincere conviction in what he is doing. And the explanation he presents is very interesting. |
Gunnar
|
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 | 06:27 PM
What I want to know is where is the rest of the body that belonged to this "starchild" skull? Did they just find the skull by itself with the female skeleton? |
havoc
|
Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 | 12:18 PM
What a scam. Send this guy money and you deserve it...... |
Noe Whan
in Earth
|
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 | 11:17 AM
The skull has iron fillings all the way though it. It's defiantly not human.
Get over it, aliens exist always have always will. Arn't we technically aliens?
 |
mulder
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 | 01:10 AM
lloyd pie=charlatan shake shake shake that dead baby skull lloyd till all the money runs out....what a scumbag |
Andrew
in Sydney
|
Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 | 10:57 PM
I'm the healthiest of healthy skeptics. I'm also very morbid so I've done a whole hell of a lot of reading into this thing because that skull is messed up. Believe me - I've sucked the net totally dry for info on this. The deformations are not due to swaddling. They produce flat surfaces. The skull (Starchild is a stupid name) is FLATTENED on the back, but not flat. Big difference. Clearly not inflicted. It's clearly not random deformity either. The argument about symmetry there is a grand slam-type deal. Deformities are never symmetrical. That's like having a perfectly spherical cancer. It's NOT congenital defect. Further, although deformed, it all keeps a perverse proportion - the fact the neck is precisely in the radically altered centre of gravity (junk science, huh?), the cut-down chewing muscles for a clearly cut-down jaw. Wasted chewing muscles in the usual spot woudl result from defect. Proportionally smaller muscles anchored in bold new places seems a little elaborate to be the result of bodgy DNA, really. The whole skull cavity thing is not so troubling as all sorts of things could have contributed to that, but paired with the rest and you just want to know, don't you? Then there's the small point of the radically different bone structure. Thinner, lighter, stronger... yeah, swaddling really does that - I've read about it in junk science like Dickhead Skeptic Monthly. I'd be very interested to see the skeleton - it doesn't follow the bone's properties would be confined to the skull.
Oh, and he's not a kid. The wear on the teeth is another grand slam-type deal. Unless he chewed his tongue in the womb, he's much older than five or six.
But it's odd no-one seems to want to help this guy out. This is the classic case for a healthy skeptic to shine, outlandish consiracy nuts to dribble on their keyboards and hardline skeptics to sound like they haven't bothered reading anything about the case. I love being a healthy skeptic. |
Michael Dowling
in Liverpool, UK
|
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 | 09:15 AM
If you read within the script from Pye concerning the joining (all by money giving. he says that anyone donating more than $250 will get full reimbursement after the positive results are returned. This is because of the further money generated from "the most important skull in the world". So the idiot at home says 'wow, I may as well donate $250, because I'll get my money back'.. Err. No they wont because it isn't an Alien Head. If there was a possibility of it being alien all the tests would have been done by this time and for zero cost to the owner. It would be that important to science. Can't people understand this hucksterism? |
healthyskepticism
in Melbourne, Florida
|
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 | 10:22 AM
The "script" is the one in your mind that determines the outcome without reading the part of the website that has nothing to do with any of the material he sells or how he is raising his money. There's a certain amount of resentment for how anyone involved in any type of paranormal research earns a living. It's a double standard of sorts. Unless they are working in what some feel is a "normal" job, they don't deserve to earn a living at whatever their life's passion is.
At this stage it's all a moot point anyway. He will never "prove" anything with his artifact. Your supposition that "if it were real" falls in line with the thinking of, "if UFOs were real they would land on the whitehouse lawn". Even if he were somehow to prove that the DNA were non human, or if the skull came to life and started telling the truth for itself, it still would not be enough "proof" for someone that has already made up their mind. That proof would end up becoming more ammunition for your prejudice that it is a hoax. Who knows what it is? But it's safe to say what it is NOT. It's not a deformity. It's not a hydrocephalic skull and from the composition of the bone, it's not a contemporary or known human race. It's also possible that it is not extra terrestrial in origin.
Instead of using the "money back guarantee" logic(?), why not do some research on the Ica skulls of Peru. They are similar in a lot of ways to the Pye skull in that the cranial capacity far exceeds the normal human size. Boarding does NOT double the size of the cranium.
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/monster.htm
These skulls have been around for a long time yet no one has done any scientific research worthy of explaining this bizarre increase in size either. The Pye skull is a little more striking however because of the eye socket size and arrangement.
Anyway... if opening your mind is out of the question you might try to at least *use* it in a way other than to point out the nature of how he is conducting his business. Or perhaps you can come up with a constructive alternative for how someone can go about raising the money to conduct these prohibitively expensive tests without raising your hackles? |
David
in Indianapolis, IN
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 | 05:05 PM
.....This is Definately an alien skull. Case closed. |
david
in indianapolis, in
|
Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 | 01:17 PM
so theirs absolutely no evidence leading anybody to believe anything other than this is a deformed human skull... not only that, it may not be 'deformed' but evolution may have skipped a few million years or something on this paticular skull... nothing more, nothing less.. No alien DNA was extracted, and nothing anymore interesting was recovered other than the mother of this was human. father's dna couldn't be extracted probably because it was damaged... hence the deformity |
Michael
in Asmar, Afghanistan
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 | 12:33 AM
Q: What is that alien looking skull named "Starchild"?
A: A hydrocephalic skull with the facial bones snapped off
Oops, seems Lloyd forgot about geological activity and it's capability of sheering or even crushing fossils and bones. This is fine though as Llyod has entered into the "cult" phase of his beliefs. Sadly his contributors are unaware that a vast majority of laboratories will gladly commence DNA testing just to have that chance of finding an "Alien Skull".
For the record their is no stigma in the scientific community of the discovery of alien remains. In fact today's scientific climate is that of unprecidented desire to find evidence for extraterrestial intelligence. The issue here is that Lloyd did not find anything remarkable. So instead of taking this to mainstream academia where his "Starchild" has already been adequately classified as very terrestial in origin, he needs to cherry pick his "experts" and circumvent one of the key pillars of science... Peer Review. |
Paul
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 | 12:58 AM
A hydrocephalic skull with the facial bones snapped off??? With perfect symmetry to both sides of the skull in all areas? Are you serious??? I think you would have been better off saying it was a dolphin that escaped from a lab after under going genetic mutation. I can kind of see where you are going with the peer review point although it's a process open to people in the scientific community (which he doesn't happen to be a member of so his "peers" are laymen with an interest in the artifact). I definitely get the impression that you have read little or none of the literature regarding the skull and it's unusual characteristics if you are saying that bones can be altered geologically with symetrical and SEEMINGLY purposeful design. Bone is not the same as a lump of coal being compressed into a diamond. Your inadequate "explanation" also does not account for the characteristics of the bone itself. The porousness of the bone throughout and the filiments discovered that strengthen the bone. Were these snapped off as well or just kind of stuffed into the bone by mother nature? One or two odd characteristics could be chalked up to a coincidence or freak of nature but the list of unusual properties of the skull is fairly extensive. But one would need to actually read the test results regarding the skull to come up with your bizarre conclusion, rather than characterising open minded people who have not come to a hasty conclusion as starchild groupies. |
Michael
in Asmar, Afghanistan
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 | 07:29 AM
What exactly is symmetrical about this skull?
Have a nice day. |
Paul
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 | 08:45 AM
The skull was examined by a craniofacial surgeon in Vancouver. Contrary to your belief, someone with as specialized a medical expertise does not benefit their reputation by examining something with the slightest possibility it is extraterrestrial. There are too many blind skeptics in the world for it to be anything but a risk to be involved with if you are reputable and respected in the scientific world. After all this is impossible right? So the guy must be crazy to say it is unlike any deformity he has ever seen. The craniofacial opinion is important because deformity is never symettrical. It also gives clues to this being, at the very least, a deformity with purpose in design. Where the vertibra attaches to the skull is off centered to account for the larger frontal lobe cranial capacity. The spine does not reallign and reattach itself in a hydrocephalic skull. Why is the spinal column attachment in an area that would be more efficient to carry this larger head? Have you been around someone with a hydrocephalic head? The majority of cases the child is unable to hold their head upright and have to remain prone in bed because the human skeleton is not designed for the extra weight. This artifact's spinal column DOES account for the imbalance.
As far as symmetry.... for starters the knitting of the bones in the skull determine the placement, pronouncement or lack of musculature on the human face. The knitting of the bone on the artifact is consistent on both sides (symetrical). The swelling of a hydrocephalic skull does not determine how the skull bones knit together. Where the knit occurs on the side determines the size of the jaw muscles. The knit on the skull is indicitive of someone with very small, almost non existant jaw muscles. This has nothing to do with hydrocephallic deformity whatsoever.
The link you sent of the picture of the skull, did you look at it by any chance? When was the last time you saw eye sockets with a plate of bone at the back of the eye???? That's where our sinuses are located and is mostly cartlidge which deteriorates in a normal human skull. In a normal skull it is hollow all the way back. Do you see any big black holes in this skull's eyes sockets???
The VERY small mouth (what is left of the upper portion) is intact enough to see this person had a tiny mouth. You don't need to see the teeth to tell it was a tiny oral cavity. The mouth doesn't shrink as the "hydrocephalic" brain swells. It is not small in proportion to the size of the head, it's small in comparison to a comparative skull of the same approximate age. Also... the mouth cavity is symetrical if you didn't notice.
Not to mention the shape of the eyes and the size of them. Are you serious??? The sockets are extremely shallow and VERY wide. What does that have to do with a person with a hydrocephalic brain? And they are the same on BOTH sides. Are you telling me you think the eyes are not symetrical? Or that the child had both a hydrocephalic brain AND an eye deformity which flattened and enlarged the eyes (on BOTH sides) like a Hanna-Barbera cartoon character and it was compounded by obviously symetrical "geological bone shearing"? I think that's really reaching. Why not just say the skull was pieced together with crazy glue in some undertaker's lab? I mean the chances of that would be much better.
I'm not an expert on the skull by any means but even 5 yrs ago when this thing first popped up online, there was enough material to scratch your head. You have to open your eyes otherwise commenting on it is meaningless and it only becomes a statement of opinion. The guy could very well be a quack but your observations don't make a lot of sense to me.
As with any of these mysteries there are groupies but there are also people that refuse to observe what is in front of their faces because it goes counter to their belief system. That is not a true skeptic. The autopilot nay sayers can be just as bad as the "groupies". |
|
Page 1 of 4 pages 1 2 3 > Last › |
