Starchild Skull – looks like a hoax, smells like a hoax…
The Starchild Skull..but is it real? I hate it when evidence is presented, but it’s not REAL evidence, but rather someone telling me that there is evidence…but in this case the names of actual experts are used…
The “Starchild” is a real, true bone skull [1] independently dated by Carbon-14 to be 900 years old (+/- 40 years) [2]. Research indicates is unlike any human skull ever before recorded [3]. The name “Starchild” is the result of early X-rays taken of the skull and maxilla fragment found with it, which showed unerupted teeth [4] that, combined with the smaller-than-normal-adult size of the skull [5], indicated a child of age 5 or 6 [6]. A second skull was found with the Starchild, a normal, adult female of small stature [7], also C-14 dated to 900 years ago (± 40) [8], and biochemically shown to have lived in the same general area as the Starchild [9]. This second skull is often used for comparison to the Starchild.
From its extremely shallow eye sockets [10] to the total lack of frontal sinuses [11], the Starchild skull’s morphology cannot be accounted for by any known combination of deformities. The bone is half as thick [12], weighs half as much [13], and is substantially more durable than normal human bone [14][15]–unlike anything currently in the scientific record [16]. Furthermore, inside that unusual bone are microscopic fibers and a reddish residue that so far defy any explanation [17].
When you are used to reading legit science papers, this seems to be kosher on the surface. But then when you follow the link to the references, you find that most are from the author of the site, or Dr. Ted J. Robinson. Dr Robinson, from a Google search, seems to be mostly known for his participation in this project.
Robinson lists a number of experts who assessed the skull. They tend to be known legitimate experts. To get 11 of them to agree with your hypothesis would be impressive for a hoax!
In short, I think that it’s a regular human with a condition we are unaware of. But as far as evidence of alien visitations go, this is pretty good.
Related posts:
Why isn't Pye in jail, or someone pursuing charges? These things are obvious scams. He takes peoples money to do fake "research." I'll bet money he takes the cash and pockets it, then has a buddy of his type up some fake report. Isn't there some laws about companies, like Lloydpye.com, Inc, deceiving people outright?
Dear Rob,
Please present evidence in which goes against the Starchild skull,
Now that is a question that you will find hard to answer,
At the moment you are saying that the evidence presented on Mr. Pye's website is not real or doesn't proof his point?
This evidence does prove such because it shows that the Starchild is nothing like what other skulls are like in appearance nor structure,
How do you think Prehistoric man was proven to be linked into evolution lets say,
It was linked by the work of archeology,
Hence we could say the same about the discovery of dinosaurs as well,
Lloyd has done his research, in my opinion, by the means of a scientist doing his work on evolution or the discovering of dinosaurs,
He has realised that this skull is special because of the structure, fibres in the skull, density of the skull and endurance,
I would love to hear some 'real' opposing questions from yourself and not jargon about Lloyd not representing his evidence correctly or more efficently!
Welcome to the Year 2010 and the evidence on Starchild which is now a couple of weeks old. DNA markers have been found that do not exist in the master DNA database.
Stay tuned.
there is no “real” opposing questions theres no much evidance
Starchild suffered from a congenital defect, specifically Brachycephaly and exorbitism. The evidence supports the fact that the Starchild was not an alien, as it suffered from various human congenital defects that are known and well documented.
Taken by itself criticism of the the star child skull makes some sense. However the case for authenticity of the skull is greatly strengthen by the confluence of many other pieces of evidence. The more you take time to understand the hard core studies of UFOlogists the more you’ll come to understand that this skull is very likely real. Also if you actually spend time studying what proponents of the “Ancient Astronaut” theory are saying then you are even more likely to understand. Skeptics tend to lack these understandings.
It is very hard for a skeptic to break free from a l lifetime of indoctrinated thought. Just reflect on how it took for the church to accept changes. (You know like the the earth is not in the center of the universe),… The scientific community is having similar issues as it too has become a “belief” system, and this is why they cannot accept the possibility that this is not a hoax.
BTW, that page and the references have been removed from the site, perhaps due to criticism? I retrieved them from archive.org:
References
1. Joel D. Wallach, BS, DVM, ND (Comparative Pathologist), “Preliminary Histology Report – Starchild Project,” unpublished, July 7 1999, 1.
2. Ken Pye, PhD, Director Kenneth Pye Associates Ltd., “Summary of ‘inorganic’ chemistry work done to date,” unpublished, received June 1 2005, p1 (referencing fig. 2).
3. Ted Robinson, M.D., LMCC, FRCS (c), Vancouver, B.C., “A Preliminary Analysis of a Highly Unusual Human-Like Skull,” StarchildProject, 25 Sept 2004, 4.
4. Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 6.
5. Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 12.
6. Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 7.
7. Lloyd Pye, “A Condensed Analysis of Two Unusual Skulls of Uncertain Origin,” StarchildProject.
8. Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 18.
9. Ken Pye, “Summary of ‘inorganic’ chemistry”, p1-2, fig 1.
10. Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 15.
11. Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 12.
12. Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 3.
13. Ibid.
14. Lloyd Pye, “Starchild: Fibers and Residue” (slideshow presentation), StarchildProject, slide 2
15. Jason Eshleman, MA, PhD, Director, Trace Genetics, Richmond, CA, “Report on the DNA analysis from skeletal remains from two skulls,” Trace Genetics, StarchildProject, 12 Aug 2003, 2-4.
16.Ted Robinson, “Preliminary Analysis,” 4.
17. Lloyd Pye, “Starchild: Fibers and Residue” (slideshow presentation), StarchildProject, slide 18.
The fact that archeologists aren’t clamoring over this skull, a skull that has been know of for many many years is just another indication that it falls outside their “box” of beliefs. Now in 2010 the skull has been shown to contain DNA that has NEVER been catalogued before. Why then aren’t the academics interested?
Answer: Because they KNOW that the results then must be a hoax or flawed.
If this is not a indication of a belief system then I don’t know what is. How can we move knowledge forward if we aren’t even willing to look? It is time for mainstream to wake up and look for alternative ideas.
There’s no mention (that I can find) of 2010 DNA tests on their site.
Well there are a number of sources other then their, less than adequate site. But you could start by watching this online video.
http://dad2059.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/is-the-star-child-skull-the-wedge-to-the-future/
Again however, the picture is much much bigger then just this skull.
Still not convinced. The video show a screens hot of results obtained from the NIH database, with the key words being “No significant similarity found”.
If this was really how they portray it, they would have no difficulty finding an expert endorsing the uniqueness of the human DNA.
The official NIH explanation for such a result suggests to me that is would be quite common for those who don’t really know what they are doing:
Below are common reasons that a BLAST search results in the “No significant similarity found” message.
Short query sequences: Short alignments may have Expect values above the default threshold, which is 10 on most pages, and, therefore, are not displayed. Try increasing the Expect threshold (under ‘Algorithm parameters’). Also, see the FAQ Submitting primers or other short sequences.
Filtering: Some of the BLAST programs mask regions of low complexity by default. These regions are not allowed to initiate alignments, so if your query is largely low complexity, the filter may prevent all hits to the database. On the Basic BLAST pages, adjust the filter settings in the section ‘Filters and Masking’, under ‘Algorithm parameters’. For a description of low complexity filters, see “What is low-complexity sequence?”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/blast/Blast.cgi?CMD=Web&PAGE_TYPE=BlastDocs&DOC_TYPE=FAQ
I’m not really trying to convince you. It will all come out in due time. My point is that an understanding of the larger picture is needed in order to discuss these issues. On both sides. My knowledge is in UFOs, the history of, current sightings, various attempts to find physical evidence and the like. I have a decent knowledge of written and verbal “myths” from multiple cultures across the face of the world. Almost all of these significant stories tell of interaction with ‘gods” “aliens” “star beings”. Are we to assume that our ancient cultures spent a huge amount of effort writing and recording fiction??
I’m well versed in the Crop Circle Phenomenon and various attempts to isolate physical evidence from the fields. The science in this field gets the same response as the Starchild skull. Ridicule.
I have a great understanding of the monoliths that are found across the world and I can tell you from first hand experience, these structures were not made by primitive cultures. Nor could many of the stones be lifted today even with our biggest cranes. Not to mention the laser like cuttings that are found in some of these stones. Do you ever wonder what the the indigenous people say about their monoliths. You bet ya, they say the “star beings” created them. For example the Summarians wrote about them extensively. The Hopi, The mayan, The Dogone, The Egyptians, etc etc. When will we decide to listen to our ancestors??
Listen to the people that claim to have been abducted, these are not crazy people as research has shown. Look at ancient art, from caves to 16th century paintings. Read the ancient Indian Vamanas. On and On and On the stories, the art, the feats, the sightings and experiences, point to and even clearly states, that this is our past.
Then ask yourself again, do you really want to close your eyes to the possibility that this skull might be real.
My point is, if you REALLY LOOK and are not blinded by mainstream beliefs, the pieces of the puzzle are very interesting. The world is much more interesting then the things we were taught in school.
Haven’t you ever wondered why humans are so different from the other animals on our planet?
What is your experience in?
As far as Blast and “No significant similarity found”. I’m not well versed in this area so I’ll let the experts argue about it. However I did find these comments about “base pairs” and the quality of the sample. perhaps this means something to you?… If so please explain.
Quoted:
The next two screen shots are taken from the national genetic database at the National Institute of Health, NIH. That public-access database is a centralized repository of all genetic information generated by geneticists all over the world, and now covers essentially all living organisms on Earth, from various kinds of viruses and bacteria, to various kinds of crustaceans and fish, to all kinds of animals and plants, including great apes and humans.
For many species, humans included, there are already nucleotide sequences covering entire genomes. Therefore, sequences from the Starchild’s DNA can be directly compared against this vast database to look for any matches. In one such comparison below, you see the text below the blue line at the bottom (if you can read it, sorry it’s so fuzzy) that 265 base pairs (a good length) of recovered Starchild nuclear DNA matches perfectly with a gene on human chromosome 1. This verifies beyond any degree of doubt that some of the nuclear DNA seen in the gel sheet is from a human being.
In the one below, and again at the bottom, you see the stunning report that in a string of 342 base pairs (another good length), “No significant similarity (is) found.” To recover a stretch of base pairs as long as that with NO reference in the NIH database is astounding because it means there is no known earthly corollary for what has been analyzed! This incredible anomaly will put the Starchild in history books!!!
Please understand that this result has now been verified several times, and a few more different fragments have been identified that cannot be matched in this database to anything known. Despite that fact, mainstream skeptics will be obligated by their positions to try to say it’s some kind of gibberish or some kind of mistake because in their world view it simply can’t be true.
The whole letter can be found here:
http://naturalplane.blogspot.com/2010/06/interview-lloyd-pye-starchild-caretaker.html
@Ash,
For starters, DNA analyses have been conducted and have never demonstrated that the skull is anything but human. As well, there is not indication that this skull is in any way the product of human-alien hybridization. Despite these two separate analyses, Pye has rejected these findings, all the while selling his books and asking for danations for his “research”. He has used the name of Dr. Ted J. Robinson as an expert, claiming that he is a “craniofacial surgeon”, and claiming that this Dr. is a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons (Canada), yet there is no indication of anyone by this name on this public directory. Hmmm.
If Pye were truly interested in finding truth in this matter, he would treat this skull like any archeological find and have it examined independently by experts. How many anthropology depts in universities across the US would turn down such an opportunity? Try ZERO. Imagine if there was any truth to what Pye claims. Such a find would prove to be the most significant discovery in the history of mankind, yet Pye refuses to let go of his cash cow.
I can see only the glint of silver in Pye’s eye, but precious little of the huble search for truth that he would like us to believe. The gullible will continue to be bilked as long as he is not exposed for the fraud he is.
So this defect causes DNA that isn’t human to appear? I don’t think so…open your minds and don’t believe everything you’re taught at school. Mainstream science has become what religion used to be.
Why is it that the folks who believe this rot never seem to have any education in science? There is not a stitch of credible evidence to support this nonsense. UFO believer, please, do yourself and those around you a favour and register in a university science program and get the degree before jumping to conclusions that you have no findings to support.
“To recover a stretch of base pairs as long as that with NO reference in the NIH database is astounding because it means there is no known earthly corollary for what has been analyzed! This incredible anomaly will put the Starchild in history books!!!”-
UFO Researcher
UFO researcher, you say the established scientists will scoff at these findings because they can’t get past their established beliefs, whilst that may well be true, it is also cuts both ways.
Ardent supporters of UFOlogy and the starchild also at times need to “Step outside! their own beliefs and scrutinise some of the “evidence” that is being touted.
One thing that has to be noted is that everything coming out of the latest Starchild video is coming from Pye…..even the latest DNA presentation on screen is being described by Pye and NOT a geneticist.
If a qualified geneticist were to conclude as Pye does that the latest DNA test “prove beyond reasonable doubt” that the Starchild is part non human then perhaps these initial results could be taken much more seriously by the scientific community as a whole.
DNA evidence announced by Pye in a Pye video with the DNA testing being done by an unnamed geneticist in an unnamed lab isn’t really going to convince anyone in the wider scientific community.
I hate to say it but there is far too much Pye in the latest Starchild video, bring on the geneticists and the experts in the video, then you might get more serious attention.
Most of the public is not capable of critical thinking, they can not evaluate issues in an objective and unbiased fashion.
The gullibility, stupidity, and foolishness of the public is why we have the type of government we do.
They believe anything that they want to believe as long as it fulfills their desires, and are easily lied to.
As proof, Obama was elected, he was a blank slate, no school records, no writings from college, he voted present so as not to offend either side of an issue, and most of his history is under lock and key, but over half of the voters believed in him, because he said the right things, or I should say, “read” the right words from his teleprompter.
Look what they got in return; a man with no experience, bad choice of advisers who have their own twisted agenda, this is what happens when a man is beholden to the handlers that pull the strings and write his words, if sell your soul to get elected, you have to pay the piper and let them or their cronies come to work with you, to ensure their agenda if pushed.
It is rather embarrassing that I share DNA with these miscreants who fall for such stupidity.
Some more comments are at this site (a site devoted to hoaxes):
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/forum/forum_comments/1960/
On page 3 is email correspondence with Pye showing him to be quite rude.
Watching a UFO show on History Channel. Pye is on this show discussing the Starchild Skull. It is important to listen to his language carefully. He is stating that “In two of three (DNA tests) there were differences from human DNA.” That would mean that in one of the three tests it exactly matches human DNA.
Just would like to see “chain of custody” records and the raw printouts of all tests (and their signed analysis printouts) performed on this skull to date. This includes storage, handling, a complete list of any chemicals used on the sample (including cutting lubricants, cleansers, etc), a complete list of anyone who’s been in contact with the sample (and swabs of their DNA collected/analyzed). The equipment used – Make/Model/etc and the related maintenance logs (ie Perkin Elmer, HP, Finnegan, Dionex, etc).
Basically: Just show us what the analytical laboratory industry has to show on a regular basis to their clients & authorities.
Refusal to do so is a STRONG indicator of a hoax (I’m an open-minded guy, think ETs are real, but, so far, the supposed owners of ET evidence never want to talk in terms of the scientific method – the ALWAYS scream conspiracy & coverup)
I have been intrigued by pseudoscience and its cultists for many years. That this is a similar cult to others is no surprise. The presentation of the so-called evidence is nicely done and errors are cleverly masked or simply ignored.
A great deal of weight is put on the “No significant similarity found” to support the alien-hybrid hypothesis. an examination of the BLAST tool (it is a publicly available tool in many forms) shows that adjusting the filters and thresholds can be done to make the analysis faster (hence its use) than the Smith-Waterman process which is time consuming but MUCH more complete since the entire database is examined, not just a filtered one.
of the 3 billion base-pairs in the Human Genome, having < hybrid—>only a little human. It would not be surprising to see claims go back to the alien origin hypothesis again once problems with the results of the incomplete genetic analysis are uncovered.
I have yet to find real science in the site. Brachycephaly and exorbitism is real and DOES explain the flatness of the skull and eye-sockets. The comments (please look for them at the site) by Mr Pye that the eyes are much like the faked alien autopsy film discredit him and the fact that the ‘autopsy” film has been debunked multiple times is never mentioned….
Cover-ups work both ways. Mr. Pye is participating in a grand one. As long as people can be fooled by Ancient Astronaut Mythology, Mr. Pye and others have an income. Once people think critically, they will lose their incomes. at best Mr. Pye has a lot of facts joined together by what is mostly good fiction. I would love to be proved wrong, and want to be. The Starchild is not good science, it is however great fiction
I have not made up my mind on the subject as not all of the facts are present, however this is what i understand is causing the divide in opinion.
DNA testing at Trace Genetics, which specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, in 2003 recovered mitochondrial DNA from the “starchild”. Since mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively from the mother, it makes it possible to trace the offspring’s maternal lineage (which is human). However Trace Genetics obtained nuclear DNA, which contains chromosomes from both the father and the mother, from the adult female skull, but was not able to recover useful lengths of nuclear DNA or Y-chromosomal DNA of the father from the Starchild skull, despite conducting six consecutive tests. Therefore no one can prove that the father of the “starchild” was human or wasn’t human.
Pye has never claimed that the mother of the child wasn’t human, he only claims that father has not been confirmed as human, and until such a time when the parentage can be proved with useful lengths of nuclear DNA opinions will remain divided.
Thats my 2 cents
Dear Tom, et al,
If it was simply that the story ended with an unobtainable sample of nuclar DNA, then that would be one thing, however, this is not the end of this story and it is the specualtion that is what is problematic. Simply because an intact sample of nuclear DNA was not obtained, does not all of the sudden mean that the DNA from the father’s contribution was “alien”….THAT is the assertion and that is what must be proven. Such conclusions were created from the outset by naming this skull (who has a need to name a skull specimen???) the “Starchild” skull. Does not not seem just a wee bit presumptuous? And who do you think named it that? Take a wild guess!
Now we are told in the latest round, that some “differences” have been found when this specimen was matched against a database. “To have recovered a string of base pairs 342 nucleotides long with NO reference in the NIH database is astounding because it means there is NO known earthly corollary for what has been analyzed!”.
Again, there is no evidence for this statement when one considers the variability between base pairs within the normal genome. If the human genome is ~ 3billion base pairs and it is estimated that human genetic variability is .01%, then that means that there can be a difference of 30million base pairs between individuals who are still considered “human”. 30million bases pairs can differ!! Take a look at what Pye concludes after he reports of “differences” in his latest DNA analysis and look at how large these differences are. Still well within what is considered “human” by any scientist.
And the science is where?
The latest I seem to read is…..(taken from http://www.starchildproject.com/dna2010.htm)
“Our geneticist is confident that complete confirmation will unfold over the following months as the Starchild Skull’s entire genome is recovered using advanced sequencing technology. Ultimately, he will be able to formally announce that he has absolute, ironclad proof that a significant part of the Starchild’s genome cannot be found on Earth.”
Would a scientist following the scientific method draw the conclusions BEFORE the findings and ever make this statement?
Basing evidence off of a screenshot is a huge HUGE farce. The ease at which one can “Adjust” aspects of a screenshot is stupifying.
Adding in the key words, “No significant similarity found” and adjusting other aspects of the screenshot to match that statement could be done by anyone with a few freeware programs and a little practice. Screenshots are in no way a credible source of proof to anything at all.
You would do well to understand this before taking a screenshot at face value, from some American hack that campaigns to groups of 8 people at a time, for “Research Money”.
I in no way will claim that this is or isn’t human what I do know is this is a genuine skull. @ screenshots search videos and you will see that its actually a skull and not a photoshopped image.
Look around you the truth is staring you in the face open your eyes and mind and you may see it. Only the ignorant and naive will or will not believe it. Wisdom is the key don’t believe everything you read truth and knowledge will set you free.
I believe he was referring to the screenshots of the so-called DNA evidence, NOT the pictures of a skull. With regard to the skull, yes, it looks like a skull from an unfortunate who had genetic diseases. Until the DNA evidence is presented in the OPEN and not via hidden Experts, it will be, at best, suspect. 340+/- base pair differences in a degraded sample which has not been matched against the entire genome is by no means unusual or points to anything other than an incomplete analysis. Please, get your sciecnce and comments right. Then we will give you some credibility. Otherwise don’t defend something against a comment that wasn’t made.
If it indeed it was a human that suffered these defects, then why does the second half of its DNA prove that it is not human? Why do the DNA results show that it is only half human?
Dear West,
How do YOU know anything at all about this skull, whether it is “human” or not? We use science these days, when we look for “truth” in the physical world. What planet are you from? Try taking a university-level course in something that the course calendar refers to as “science”, and then you might see how much of a load of BS the whole story is.
Why is there not a single peer-reviewed journal article that has been published on Planet Earth that supports this nonsense? Why has not a single scientist trained in genetics ever stood with his/her reputation in hand, and agreed that this skull is not human, but “alien”?
Finn said, “Why has not a single scientist trained in genetics ever stood with his/her reputation in hand, and agreed that this skull is not human, but “alien”?”
Because they’d be ridiculed, ostracized, and canned for being a lunatic, a prattler, or just plain bonkers. Professional peer pressure is nothing to be trifled with and no one in the mainstream can be expected to rock the boat.
Roger,
Do you say this based on first-hand experience or is this just somehting that you want to believe? Any scientist on the planet would give nearly anything to have their name on such a discovery, if true. What you are saying is nonsense and sounds like you’ve been reading too much from the Annals of Pye and other charlatans. History is replete with snake-oil salesmen trying to ply their wares on the uneducated and gullible and this is no different. The problem is with the lack of evidence and utter lack of any understanding of how scientific research is conducted, both his, and apparently, yours.
Try the education.
No one in the mainstream? I beg to differ. I believe we all know some people who agreed to take what was then a ridiculous position and exposed themself to ridicule of their peers. You may have heard of them, several were named Leakey, Einstein, Fermi, Watson, Bohr, Crick, Hawking, and many others. Their hypotheses were controvertial and exposed to severe peer review and what was the result? If you have to be told then you need to open a book and read…….
No true Scientist I have ever worked with or known has cared about the scrutiny, but rather welcomed it. If they have their evidence in hand, their investigative methods well delineated and documented, and actually believe what they are saying, then the peer criticizm is welcome. This comes as further proof of the veracity and elevates their research to something other than pulp-fiction science (such as this pseudo-Star-Child). I would gladly be called a lunatic (and have) when a discovery or hypothesis of mine went against the grain of accepted science. Shrodinger did, Hubble did, Heisenberg did….. Who am I to think it should be any easier for me? Why should it be easier for anyone else? Truely great fame requires great risk….
ufology is not a legitimate field of study that you can try to hang over a real scientists head bro. that shit you say about primitive cultures not being able to build those monolilths or us not even being able to move them today is straight bullshit. your logic is horrible, what research specifically shows people who claim to be abducted are not crazy? how could anyone even go about determining that?”the feats” man? c’mon, they easily could have developed machines using manpower to put those structures together. we are so different because we are the first animal to evolve this far, that DOES NOT make us special, given time and natural events another spiecies may live here and become far more advanced than us after we are gone. show me some real evidence that ufo’s even have a single thing to do with aliens. they’re objects in the sky that are unidentified, but thats all they are, UNIDENTIFIED! that does not make them alien
For what it’s worth I recently did a search for the Ted J Robinson that is Pye’s major source, and the only one I found was this guy
http://www.healthgrades.com/physician/dr-ted-robinson-3dcjh/
Who isn’t a facial reconstruction expert, and isn’t from Vancouver. The Ted J Robinson Mr Pye quotes can’t be found anywhere. I also did a search for Trace Genetics and couldn’t find…well, a trace of them either. And then I found this forum…
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/forum/forum_commnts/1960/P40/
That gives examples of others trying and failing to find these guys, and also of Pye’s abusive responses when asked to give information on these people.
I suspect these guys guys never existed and Mr Pye is duping a lot of trusting people.
Well, it’s 2011 and I’m just now hearing or reading about this skull. I think it’s a hoax someone did with a real skull. The hardness with fibers mixed in with the bone is a really big clue. Maybe a human skull mixed in with some sort of material and glued together. Could be that the experts just can’t admit or find what it is in their tests. Ancient cultures could do some gruesome things to their bodies and to their dead so maybe they did it after the death of a deformed child. I’ll bet that guy in Egypt who tests the mummies, and runs the museum could figure it out.