Survive 2012 by Robert Bast - Special Offer at Amazon - Click Here!
Powered by MaxBlogPress 

Dark Comets »

Another Expert Agrees With Dark Comet Theory

February 21, 2013 – 11:31 am | No Comment

Astronomer David Asher (from Armagh University) has agreed with Bill Napier and Janaki Wickramasinghe (Cardiff University) that “dark comets” are real and dangerous.
The following quotes are from a paper by Napier and Asher published in Astronomy & Geophysics.
http://star.arm.ac.uk/preprints/2009/539.pdf

We know that about one bright comet (of absolute magnitude as bright as 7, comparable to Halley’s Comet) arrives in the visibility zone (perihelion q<5AU, say) each year from the Oort cloud. It seems to be securely established that ~1–2% of these are captured into Halleytype (HT) orbits. The dynamical lifetime of a body in such an orbit can be estimated, from which the expected number of HT comets is perhaps ~3000. The actual number of active HT comets is ~25. This discrepancy of at least two powers of 10 in the expected impact rate from comets as deduced from this theoretical argument on the one hand, and observations on the other, is …

Read the full story »
Bunkers

From DIY to Russian megabunkers

Survivalism

Preparing for when the SHTF

Pole Shift

Crustal displacements and magnetic pole shift – both are scary

Comets

Don’t believe NASA – these are a genuine threat

Earthquakes

More likely during eclipses and perhaps Comet Elenin is a factor?

Home » Uncategorized

Starchild Skull – looks like a hoax, smells like a hoax…

Submitted by on January 8, 2007 – 2:50 pm104 Comments

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.

104 Comments »

  • Finn says:

    Dear Mark,

    In science, at least, quantitatively-speaking, videos are of limited value. In this particular instance, we would be looking for the published data to be included within a research paper that specifically outlined the experimental methodology so that it could be replicated in at least one (many) independent labs. Never has this been provided. This data has never been made available to the scientific community and therefore, no conclusions can be offered. Unfortunately, the proponent of this nonsense chooses to sell books to the masses, and the years go by, with nothing more than talk.

    If you wish to spend your money on his book(s), please feel free. To the educated public, this story has ended as it began, with nothing but greed.

  • Robert Bast says:

    Guys – there is a simple solution to all of this. An acknowledged legitimate expert needs to verify the conclusions made.

    Example:

    Claim – sample contains non-human DNA
    Sensationalist conclusion – it is an alien!
    Expert conclusion – pieces of the DNA sample did not match human DNA because they were incomplete

    It’s the same as amateurs making conclusions about NASA images, where a speck of a dust becomes a UFO.

  • Finn says:

    Claim: Starchild Skull cotnians DNA from non-human source.

    Evidence: NONE

  • Finn says:

    Robert,

    I bother to respond simply because science does not require an authority. In fact, science does away with an authority. A supreme authority is a deity and science does not require faith in the supernatural. Science requires not an expert, but scientifically literate individuals who do not accept less than evidence of the claim made.

    There is no debate. No evidence, nothing more to say.

  • stephen stockton says:

    Whether you all believe me or not I really don’t care. Everybody has opinions. OK With that said I’m here to tell you that I personally have examined this skull and it is without a shadow of doubt absolutely not human and further more it is absolutely not a result of disease or malformation. The structure is completely wrong. I could write about 4 pages of description of this skull. If you want the REAL TRUTH and not internet shadow truth then contact me at so.light@sbcglobal.net and I would be happy to explain it to you.

  • Finn says:

    Stephen,

    The issue is not whether anyone believes you, but whether there is evidence to support the claim. Opinions don’t matter because the question being posed is whether this skull might be derived from parents or parent that is not human. There is no one on Earth who could have an opinion that could answer this question, which is why we use science to answer such questions. Why would anyone bother to contact YOU (or anyone for that matter) to provide such an answer? How did you come to know something that has not been found to be supported by previous DNA assays? If you have an expertise in genetics, molecular biology, forensic anthropology, you would not be offering your personal email address, but instead, you would be offering the citation of the published scientific journal where the research study was found. Why don’t you do that for us instead of using a language style that is of a kid in high school?

    Which journal is the evidence published in please?

  • Mark says:

    Dear Finn,

    I emailed Lloyd Pye directly and got a response. It was within five minutes of me sending the email. I was surprised he returned to answer my questions at all let alone so quickly.

    Anyway, I asked him why he was yet to publish his claims for peer review, he said;

    1. The information extracted so far tells us fairly conclusively what we have been claiming as ‘evidence’. The only issue is that the scientific community require nothing short of 100% undeniable evidence. This means they will NOT accept our 80% and we will therefore not publish unfinished work regardless of its strengths.

    2. We require funding for the next line of tests, the results of which we will publish in addition with our previous findings

    He pretty much confirmed what I suspected. What they know about the skull warrants what he is publicly claiming but he won’t publish unfinished work because, rightly so, it will be dismissed as insufficient to support the claims.

    You can’t blame the guy for protecting himself against people such as yourself who are only interested in tearing him apart

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    I have heard the same bs for far too long. Still asking for money.

    Let me ask you something Mark. When you say that he confirmed what you suspected, what did he confirm? To confirm is to provide conclusion, which is not the case. The word that you should have used might be “believe”, as in, “He told me what I wanted to believe.”

    In any legitimate lab, this work would be done and the results published long ago, but this is now more than 10 years of making excuses.

    Where is the science? Where is the evidence?

  • Mark says:

    Lets be honest you use science as a camouflage. The other reason you can’t even accept it as a reasonable possibility is because the ramifications do not fit within your closed minded world view. Nobody is asking you believe him without a full body of evidence, I don’t, but at least I can accept it as a likely outcome, you simply can’t.

    You will respond to this by saying. It is not science, he is not a scientist, he has no evidence. Your right but the fact is, even if he was all of those things and he did publish evidence for peer review you would still deny it all. You would and don’t pretend like you wouldn’t. The truth is you cannot accept the notion that there is a fkn alien skull on Earth, you cannot accept what that would mean for everything you have been misled to believe.

    Once more Im not saying its real or that he even has the evidence yet, all Im saying is that you can’t accept even the reasonable possibility that it might be true

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Let’s be honest, I use science because I have an education in science and you don’t. That is being honest.

    There is no evidence to support the claim and that is a reality that you refuse to accept. Instead, you stumble about looking for magical explanations for what can and has already been answered.

    Go to university and get an education like all the other folks who can go on to talk about science. Until then, try harder Mark.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    A “reasonable possibility” requires two things:

    1) That by being “reasonable”, there is no other explanation that is far more reasonable because if there is, then it is not “reasonable”, but “unreasonable”.

    2) That it is possible. Since it is not possible to rule out what is possible, then, sure, anything is possible. Simply because it is “possible” that the Sun will extinguish tomorrow does not mean that it will, or that I will win the next lotto, or the infinite number of other possibilities, but, that does not make this skull any less human.

    As for hiding behind “science”, well, why is Pye claiming to use science to support the claim if science is simply used to hide behind? Either science is used properly, or it is not, and therefore it is not science at all. Instead, ignorant, uneducated fools fall for the PSEUDOSCIENCE that this is and yet never know the difference.

    Get the education.

  • Robert Bast says:

    If there was any chance of the result being genuine proof of aliens, then you’d presume getting the funds would be easy.

    Where’s the online donation campaign?

    Which rich and famous New Agers or alternative history authors has he asked for help?

    Why hasn’t he re-mortgaged his house?

  • Finn says:

    Robert,

    These questions have been asked for 10 years now, with no answer, but the same tired excuses keep bobbing up and down like a semi-submerged log rotting in a stagnant pond. Take it even further though…There is not a scientist on the planet who wouldn’t jump at the chance to do legitimate research on anything that might have looked promising after the initial tests were run in 1999 and then in 2003. Any university would love to get their hands on something that might have such potential for discovery and they wouldn’t charge a nickel for doing it either. But the very qualified people who ran those tests concluded that it was human. Yes, as Mark so eloquently put it, it is still POSSIBLE that despite this, the skull could have been derived from DNA from a father who was a watermelon and a mother who was a moose. Yes, in the world of magic and make believe, anything is possible. In the world of science too, anything is possible. The difference is that when real science is used to investigate, then real scientists do it and accept reality.

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    What are you talking about? Clearly not about reality..

    Its reasonable because he has the evidence, or if you so ignorantly refuse, the ‘information’. Only you choose in profound arrogance to ignore that fact. Go to his site which details all the results from DNA extraction. Or if you are too moronic to be motivated to actually educate yourself on this topic, have a look at the photographic evidence which details physical comparisons, or there lack of, to a normal human skull. On that photographic basis, I say it is not a magical but a reasonable judgment to question further. You do not because you haven’t seen the PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence, but refute it anyway. Yeah, some awesome and legitimate scientist you are!

    If you would like to have a scientific discussion I am more than happy.

    It is extremely confusing how you can refute photographs and information you have never seen? If you are such a talented scientists (who spends his time on a website) WHY DON’T YOU EXPLAIN THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE SCIENTIFICLY? Or are the photos fake as well?

    You aren’t a scientists mate, just somone who pretends to be

  • Mark says:

    Robert,

    Good questions, at least you approach this with an open mind. He needs 4 million dollars to do the next line of testing, he does have an online campaign. If you email him at Lloyd.Pye@gmail.com he will return your email straight away.

    He has been asking for money and using his own money for ten years now, I dare say he has exhausted many of the few individuals who are financially capable and or interested in donating.

    Robert, Finn is a closed minded fool who’s life revolves around, sleeping, eating, working, studying, finding a girl friend and playing on the internet. No doubt an intelligent guy, but unfortunately just one of those people who simply cannot perceive a reality outside of their basic and naive little paradigm of belief. He uses ‘science’ as a security blanket to bring certainty and form to a world which is profoundly chaotic and uncertain.

    People like myself on the other hand don’t believe that the skull is really alien but I am at least open to the possibility. Finn on the other hand dismisses this basic reasoning with childlike references to magic and watermelons. Its a pity that science is being represented by such ignorant people.

    Robert, no body has to believe anything, but it is our duty to ourselves to give proper and reasonable thought to whatever is of importance to our world. From where I stand, if this is real, it’s pretty important.

    Unlike Finn, try to keep an open mind it is the only thing we truly have.

    Cheers

    Mark

  • Robert Bast says:

    That would be $4 million for the doco (I wonder how much the producer gets?) and a few thousand for the genome sequencing.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_genomics

  • Mark says:

    Robert

    Its actually 4 million for two doco’s. Two million a piece. The director is a world renowned BBC doco producer, so the quality will match the cost. 2m being a reasonable price for a cinema calibre film.

    The cost of the sequencing is approx 3 million – The cost to sequence human genome, preserved or alive, may have become extremely cheap, but unfortunately the cost to sequence a foreign genome from contaminated property of 900 years ago, remains very very costly. Wiki is informative but not specific.

    If you have questions just email Lloyd, he will tell you what the plans are

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Where do you get your confidence that there is evidence for this nonsense when there has never been evidence provided? How is it that only you are privy to this secret stash of knowledge? Where is this “information”? Why has nothing ever been published in credible scientific journals and yet all of the rest of humanity’s accomplishments and discoveries are to be found published in these journals of our scientific undertakings?

    Your photographic evidence is from where? Of course it is reasonable to continue to question—that is what science is all about, but there are a myriad of amazing questions to answer, and this skull (or a discovery with the potential that it might have had) could have been one.

    We answered the question and that is all there is. It was shown to be human. Read the reports with the science education you have (what grade did you finish?). The experts in both cases were consistent in their conclusions that the skull was human with human parents. All done. Move on to your next pseudoscience project…what is it, UFO’s?

    You do not have the education to carry on with a scientific discussion, but, I too am happy to chat about anything you wish. Photography is not what scientists use in discussion, artists use that. We have much higher power to derive conclusion using technology that surpasses photography. This is why we now use DNA assays instead of other techniques in solving crimes. In fact, there are numerous examples of where convicted felons have been released from custody and granted pardon because the DNA technology that was only developed after they were originally convicted, later demonstrated their innocence.

    Scientists use scientific papers published in credible scientific journals and discuss the data and interpret the findings thus. Let’s talk about ANY scientific publication of your choice.

    Finish high school and go to university and stop talking like an idiot Mark.

  • Mark says:

    Eerggg!!

    Finn! Please man wtf

    Again what you say has ZERO relation to the Skull!

    It was NOT proven to be human. The tests were carried out as part of a student project! The analysis was conducted by students for free, using basic tools which share no resemblance to those which are now known to be able to correctly complete such a difficult task. It was a voluntary practice exercise for the students. Little did they know that the technology and techniques required to do what they were attempting wouldn’t even be available for a few more years. The results are completely wrong and have been shown to be wrong.

    Please man, this is doing my head in. Have you even had a look at the website? He has a gallery of a hundred photos of this thing. Detailed X-ray cross-sections etc etc

    He goes through each part of the skull and scientificly details how it is deformed, what potential known conditions could account for it, what cultural practices are known to cause such deformities etc etc. There are 25 major physical differences which cannot be accounted for by any known genetic deformities or any physical manipulations.

    If you bothered to GO ON THE WEBSITE all this stuff is freely available. What is your email address? Can I send you a pdf document 160 pages long with ALL the info I am refering to?

    Are you interested in seeing for yourself why this is so compelling? Can I please send this to you?

    Mark

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Why is it that there is not one single scientist on the planet who agrees with anything that Pye says? Not one. Pye is not considered an “expert” in any field of study or human endeavour. Nothing he has ever said or written has reached an educated audience. The real experts have pointed to glaring errors in his rantings and endless theories. Despite invitation, he has never provided evidence for his claims and instead, he gives just another excuse.

    It is only because of ignorant and uneducated people just like you, who have no means of assessing and separating the wheat from the chaff, that pseudoscience can take hold. You provide exactly the reason why we make sure our kids get a good education in science. Imagine if society was limited to the extent that your education and understanding of natural phenomena has limited you.

    If you wish to discuss science, then do so at the level that is available to those who have that education. Otherwise, admit that you don’t have the education that others do and just say, “I don’t know enough about this to discuss”, and then go to university and get the science degrees.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    In fact, it WAS shown to be human and of human parents.

    Please read the reports from the original source, not from someone’s personal website. Science does not publish findings in personal websites.

    Go to university and get the education in science.

    You are incorrect.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    The results of both tests, from 1999 and 2003 were published and the tests were NOT done by students.

    You are incorrect.

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    I know it sounds like bs but I do speak to Lloyd – It just so happens that tomorrow they will be submitting their findings to NIH. The Geneticist who carried out the tests has put his name to the submission and there are another three field experts who agree with the findings and have put their name to the submission.

    They’re chasing a grant. The process if you are unaware is to peer review the submission…

    You can say whatever you want but you will be proven wrong, it’s a matter of months maybe a couple years. If you want some evidence follow this link below and scroll down. When you think their is no evidence, keep scrolling down and then scroll down some more.

    http://www.starchildproject.com/dna2011march.htm

    I will keep you updated as I find out more. Don’t worry Finn Im not some fkn loser who patrols websites lying to strangers. I’ve been told they are submitting their work tomorrow.

    Mark

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    Please attach a link to the websites you are acquiring your info.

    Otherwise don’t even try to use the word pseudoscience. I can tell by talking to you that you dramatically misunderstand my position, intent and understanding. I completely and thoroughly understand the imperative of science and despite your assumptions I am of a scientific outlook and discipline. It is a fault of judgment for you to generalize and assume my partaking in UFO conspiracies or whatever.

    The facts are, I understand perfectly well when you blindly lecture about scientific process and verification. OBVIOUSLY, the Star child skull means ZERO until it is peer reviewed and alternatively tested. Im not disputing that, I never did.

    All Im doing is defending an intrigue into a subject which I feel holds face value prior to being verified. That is all – The difference between you and I is simple

    PRIOR TO VERIFICATION – You choose to believe it is a hoax and I choose to believe it may be real.

    The only misunderstanding to come between us is the one where you fail to see that simple reality. That is not to say I withdraw my comments regarding your limmited paradigm of perception.

    Mark

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    What language are you trying to use. Your first sentence does not make sense.

    You do not possess the level of education to even begin to understand this topic.

    You are incorrect on all counts. Let it go and stop obsessing over something that you are wasting your time on. Instead, finish high school and go on to a good university and get the science degrees like everyone else who understands science.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Ten years of “tomorrows” means no more than zero today. Your lack of education places you at risk and you have fallen victim to the pseudoscientific nonsense that the Internet abounds with.

    Go get the degrees in science and then let’s discuss.

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    Contrary to what you have led yourself to believe, Generalizing doesn’t make you sound intelligent, it makes you sound idiotic. You approach these debates with prejudicial ideas about the nature of information available and you use generalizations with zero application to the debate itself. You do this only because you lack the intellect to make innovative judgments based on information presented to you. It is an ancient mechanism for the moronic, and it lives on in you.

    Like I said, you pretend to be a scientist, when its obvious you are likely some semi retarded teenager with zero life experience. Let me tell you Finn, it is very noticeable that you probably haven’t seen the light of day for some time. You fail to understand the basic premise of my posts/information, moreover, when you do not agree or simply do not understand you begin discussing issues only relevant to you. It’s very embarrassing, fortunately for you, you are far to ignorant to see it.

    Your not a scientist and its laughable that you claim to be. Your arguments hinge on science but not once have I seen you site or locate to source of your evidence. You are by definition, a heretic. REAL scientists laugh at pretenders like you. You probably completed a 2 week scoober diving course just so you could pretend to own the logical high ground in debates of which it is so obvious you haven’t considered nor understood the evidence. I can tell by talking to you, you haven’t seen any of the information released. Instead like the ignorant moron you are, you make judgments based on belief and then fool yourself into thinking you used science. It’s not possible to apply a scientific method to a debate of which you haven’t seen the details. You must be profoundly handicaped. For this I am sorry.

    Fact; you are not interested in discussing or even reading the information concerning the Star Child Skull. Not once have you spoken scientificly about any piece of information, nor do you have the knowledge of any information. It is ludicrous and highly hypocritical that you request support of evidence (then choose to ignore it) and simply refuse to provide any supporting citation for your claims. It is a fact that you are an imposter with zero proof of any credentials. But of course you would never let proof get in the way of an argument of beliefs now would you? You imposter.

    Finn, for what its worth, I finished a full education with an outstanding mark and decided against University only to take up a lucrative opportunity in property development. Family business, what can I say?

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    You are uninformed and uneducated.

    I suggest that you begin by getting an education past high school, go on to univeristy to get the science degrees and begin to learn what scientific research entails and what it does not.

    Once you can claim those skills and experiences, please join the professional world of scientists.

    You are wasting your time talking about a subject that you know absolutely nothing of.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    What is “scoober diving”?

    Do you mean SCUBA diving? (Self-Contained-Underwater-Breathing-Apparatus). Did you mean that?

    Finish high school Mark. You are making an idiot of yourself.

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    But you still haven’t answered any of the questions asked by Pye?

    Instead of discussing the information you choose to tell people they cannot?

    You discredit anyone who asks valid questions?

    You are fixated on minor and irrelevant issues which share no relation to the issue?

    You claim to have an education but have no proof?

    You cannot talk scientificly about any single part of the information provided by Pye, instead you choose to tell others they have no right to ask valid questions?

    You are making a complete moron of yourself by commiting your time to dismissing opinion based on information you have never seen?

    Again you are not a scientist and it is so pathetic that you pretend to be

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    I know you have never been part of anything meaningful in your entire life, so you hold onto the idea that ‘science’ provides you a chance to be a part of something. I don’t care how pathetic you are, or how little money you make, or how few times you’ve had sex. What I care about is truth and what you are trying so desperately to do is obstruct the path to truth by ignoring evidence and claiming without proof that you are qualified and using that supposed qualification to dismiss legitimate question and reasoning.

    Science: Systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

    With regard to the science of the Skull, with or without qualification, if you have not seen the evidence, you are not qualified for the Skull. Ok?

    Your a nodody Finn, certainly not a scientist, in whatever way you were implying that broad term

    You are making an idiot of yourself because you have asked or answered ZERO questions, while telling people they cannot…

    Serious question, are you trolling?

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Please fet an education in science and stop obsessing about nonsense.

    Seriously, you need to find something meaninful to do, much moreso than making an idiot of yourself.

    You have no education and you simply do not know what you are talking about.

    If you can provide evidence for anything at all related to this topic, please provide the serachable citation of a credible journal article, just like every single scientist on the planet is capable of doing.

    Go finsih high school and then go get the university education.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Try to focus on what is relevant here.

    There is no evidence that has ever been made available in any form that satisfies in any way, science, insofar as this skull is concerned. For this reason, not a single scientist on the planet takes Pye seriously. If there was evidence of any sort, why has it never been presented in the way that every single discovery in science within the past 100 years has been, in a form that is shared within the scientific community?

    If Pye wishes to be taken seriously, why not do real science? Real scientists perform the research, repeat the reasearch, and then and only then, draw a conclusion. Instead, Pye has make the claim that this skull is of non-human origin and waited over 10 years, asking for money all along the way. When real scientists provided evidence that this skull had derived from human parents, something that disqualified his theory conclusively, he refused to accept it and instead, made excuses that only uneducated people like you fall for. Why is that Mark?

    Why is it that the very brightest mind in genetics, molecular biology, genomics, anatomy, anthropology, etc., disagree with him entirely, and yet you, without a high school diploma, argue like an idiot about it? Not a single scientist on the planet agrees with him. Yet you, a guy who cannot even write properly, speak as if you know something that no one else does. I teach anatomy and physiology courses in university and I rarely see such blatant demonstrations of ignorance in a student. You have obviously never even been close to a university before, have you? Admit it Mark, you have no education and you are obsessing about something simply because you cannot admit that you really don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

    Let go and move on. There is no evidence to support this rip-off.

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    Again, you make your best efforts attempting to discredit rather that examine. Do you know where you are? This is not a Cambridge University online laboratory, its a fkn forum called ‘survive2012′ !!!

    On this website I DO NOT require a peer reviewed citation in order to discuss information claimed as evidence. You demand a peer review citation because you are under the impression that all your little problems disappear in the absence of one.
    I cannot believe how arrogant and pathetic you are if you think I believe you lecture those topics, let alone actually hold qualification in any way relevant to what we are talking about. Your not fooling anyone (so fkn pathetic)

    Now, I take your points about Pye and why it looks and smells like a hoax. We agree that it is most likely a pseudoscientific campaign for the purpose of making money. If you do NOT hold that impression then of course there is something wrong.

    We both know he is yet to publish his latest findings for peer review and this is why you demand it. Meanwhile, you neglect the fact that there are archives of Photographic evidence to examine, why?

    Finn, if you actually have a connection to the world of science, you should be well aware that funding, grants, awards, donations and employment are avenues which are bound to sentiment, expectation, and prior to evidence, they’re bound to belief. Who is ever going to jeopardize their career for the sake of publicly supporting the Star Child Skull (how ridiculous is that name). He literally has a handful of professional genetisis who have now put there names to the work. Of course most credible scientists don’t agree with him, most of them would never have examined the evidence, much like yourself.

    Once more this is a public forum, it is designed to house here say and speculation. I think you would agree, this is then the best place to discuss the information prior to peer review.

    You are an idiot talking the way you are on a forum like this. Does Pyes work need to be peer reviewed for it to hold scientific meaning? No! Scientific credibility and weight? Yes!

    Unfortunately the latest work won’t be peer reviewed for sometime (I have been told they’re gathering a body of work to submit). It has been 6 months since the latest results were complete, so whether its true or not, Im going to give him the benefit of the doubt for a short while until the work is peer reviewed. You will not and that is your choice.

    Until that time, unfortunately I will have to settle for discussing the photographic info and the ramifications of the reported DNA results.

    If you don’t want to do that Finn, then fk off back to your imaginary classroom. Your probably some petty PE teacher.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Where is the evidence?

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    http://www.starchildproject.com/

    All that is required is effort. Read, examine, deduce, determine. Is that not what the peer review process is?

    Mark

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    I have read all that there is to read and I am very well educated in science and scientific research and its methods.

    Please provide the evidence as it is published in credible scientific journals to support this claim.

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    The peer review process in science requires scientists to be engaged in the process. You are not a scientist and neither is Pye. The peer review process is only possible AFTER publication of the results into a credible scientific journal. This has never occurred.

    Please provide the searchable citation for the journal entry in the standard format of:

    Author(s), year, title of paper, title of journal, publisher.

    Thanks

  • Mark says:

    Finn

    You are a consummate broken record.

    What claim? That there is information which cannot be explained scientificly?

    You respond to this by saying it must be published before you will read it?

    Please Finn, you are the hoax. Facts are, on the site, within this debate, it doesn’t need to be published. You are blatantly refusing to engage information because you believe you will not agree with it. Not for one second do I, or anyone else believe that you have read anything on that page…

    Once more and for the final time, you have no concern for truth and objectivity. You are concerned only with what you believe within your ignorance.

    Frankly Finn, a true scientist, with an honest and objective endeavor would have combed through that site in detail. A true scientist would be a master of whatever information is presented, whether it appears to contradict their beliefs or not. Einstein, well, thats what he would have done.

    As a man who respects you for your effort, I hope that you can eventually open your mind to the true nature of the universe, to see that the naive descriptions of science have no place in reality (research quantum mechanics). The Star Child Skull is just another possible wonder. To be a true scientist, you must be open to the profound nature of that which you are attempting to tame.

    Goodluck Finn, Im not coming back to this site – the internet is a large place. Nice talking.

    Mark

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    If there is published evidence to be found in credible scientific journals, please provide the citation, as is the accepted method in science to share information in the peer review process that you refer to.

    Can you provide this please?

  • Finn says:

    Mark,

    Finish high school.

  • Boetheus says:

    This lengthy conversation thread is quite illustrative of the dangers of pseudo-science. It is rather obvious that Mr. Pye is a charlatan, constantly raising money for more “research”, even though he claims to have already “uncovered DNA so different from human that the working theory is now at minimum it is a new species, and very likely it is an alien species of extraterrestrial origin”. If this were even remotely true, he would have published these findings so that they could be peer reviewed and replicated. His refusal to do so tells me that there is no such evidence.

    There are many extraordinary wonders in the universe, many or most of which have yet to be uncovered. However, the mere possibility that an apparently deformed skull is actually half human and half space alien, is no more reason to believe in the truth of the proposition, than is the mere possibility that this very post is being written by the granddaughter of the said space alien. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. For a start, someone claiming to have evidence that this alleged skull is the offspring of an alien must publish the evidence supporting this in a scientific journal and release the skull for analysis by independent scientists. Pye refuses to do this. The most likely reason being that the alleged skull is a complete fake, or the skull of a person with a genetic defect. Frankly, Pye’s behavior suggests the former.

    Finn has unfortunately descended into personally insulting language, but it is easy to understand his frustration. Mark acknowledges that “the Star child skull means ZERO until it is peer reviewed and alternatively tested”, but still insists that we should give Pye the benefit if the (supposed) doubt, even though it is Pye who refuses that very peer review and testing. Mark feels that on the basis of the bare possibility that Pye is not a con man, we should give him $4,000,000.00 to do some more “testing”. Somehow, I doubt that Mark has personally cut a cheque to support this madness, although there are many who want to believe so badly that they will be taken in by this all too common con.

    Ask yourselves this question. Is it more likely that a person untrained in science who for more than a decade has been selling t-shirts, books and speaking engagements while refusing to expose himself to the scrutiny of qualified independent scientists, is:
    a) in possession of a hybrid human/space alien skull and clear and compelling scientific evidence of this fact; or
    b) trying to separate gullible people from their money?

    For those of you who think the answer is a), please explain to all of us why you haven’t already given all your money to Mr. Pye already?

  • Finn says:

    Boetheus,

    While I agree with your comments, it is difficult to understand why you might wait so long to offer up your thoughts when Pye has been selling his Starchild snake-oil for over 10 years now, and then wag your finger at me with your patriarchal comment.

    Give me a break.

  • K. Marsh says:

    Wow:
    You all need to grow up!! Get a life and stop wasting it calling each other names. Not one of you has the slightest idea what it means to be open-minded. If you did, you would just wait for the final conclusion to be published and decide for yourself weather or not you want to donate to the cause in the mean time. Stop telling others how to believe and just worry about YOU! It is extremely obvious how much it bothers each of you that you can not control how the other person thinks and believes. Get use to it, we all have the right to our own beliefs.

    Sincerely,
    Jehovah’s Girl

  • Finn says:

    Dear JG,

    First off, if you knew the slightest thing about science and scientific research methodology, you would know that the error lies at the feet of Pye, who made the conclusion long ago that this skull was of alien origin. Why else would he call it “Starchild” and keep arguing that the child could not have been simply born with a congenitally malformed skull?? Second, DNA analyses have already been conducted and were shown to provide no evidence to conclude that the skull was anything but human. Didn’t you know this? Third, when you say, “…decide for yourself weather or not …”, the word is “whether”, not “weather”.

    Yes, you have the right to your own “beliefs”, and if you wish to believe in Santa Claus, you have that privilege, but the issue is not about belief, but about science. There is a huge difference, one which you would know if you had an education that included even the slightest sprinkling of science.

  • Maryet says:

    To research various websites, it seems as if there is some sort of movement to get the public to believe in aliens, as opposed to either evolution or God. There is this “Starchild”. There is the supposed use of monoatomic gold to (eventually) turn to “light” and “ascend” to (presumably) some sort of spirit being. Only this evening I caught, in passing, something on television about one of our former Presidents having been told by “an alien” that he should run for presidency – and that was supposedly serious!!!

    I spent a year living next door to a hospital that specialized in dealing with the numerous abnormalities afflicting unborn babies, newborn babies, and on up through the years of childhood. I was at that hospital daily, as my own beautiful grandchild was born with organs of her lower abdomen in her chest – and her heart located then on the wrong side of her chest, with huge holes in it. The bones of her upper legs and upper arms, even prior to birth, did not measure to be “normal” in length. Who knows why?

    I witnessed such illnesses and deformities, including those of my own precious grandchild, that it has forever impressed on my mind the cruelty there can be in life. The strange occurrences that can baffle science – let alone those who are not trained.

    I, myself, am one example, having “developed” a rare disorder in which my own immune system attacks and destroys my flesh. Clearly there is something – still poorly understood by science – that makes me genetically different from nearly all others. Yet I can assure that I was born to human parents, neither of whom had the immune disorder I developed. Nor have any of my eight siblings, nor blood-related relatives developed it. Only me, for some unknown reason.

    Personally, I feel that it is shameful to exploit the remains of that child, whoever he / she was. If there is genuine concern, then the remains should be turned over to higher study, and in a respectful manner. Can something be learned that might prevent or cure the same condition in some future child? Or, if by some strange case it should be confirmed that the child was varied from what is deemed “human”, then perhaps much could be learned to benefit any others who might fit the same ‘race’ of beings. But, you know, four million dollars could go a long way towards cures for children who are fighting to survive now. Those who go to bed hungry every night. Those who are living with illnesses and abnormalities in the present. Those who will be left to survive in the environmentally unhealthy mess that has been made of this planet we must all share.

    Since the dawn of man has been the question: Where did we originate from? What if it was from aliens? (Whatever aliens are perceived to be.) Even if we were to discover that much as fact, wouldn’t it only leave us wondering where the aliens originated from? Either way it would lead back to: Who, or what created life? The chicken or the egg.

  • Jon says:

    I know one thing is for sure..I’m willing to wager that with the abundance of scientific knowledge and supposed education from the “university” (lol who talks like that) that Finn seems to have, I bet I still make a f**k load more cash with half his “education”. Anyone that sits around trying to argue with another adult early in the morning in the middle of the week, clearly doesnt have his s**t together… let me ask you this Finn, has any of your vast scientific “education” ever created a scenario in which allows you the opportunity to watch 2 tight bodied 22 year old girls finger bang each other on the deck of your boat in South Beach, all before they express their “oral talents” on you? wait, wait…before you respond, let me use my powers of the “university” to help find the answer that im looking for…Ive got it! the answer is NO!!! If you dont take anything else away from this reality check that I’ve just presented to you, take away this final thought…while you were typing away at your keyboard, trying to belittle Mark back in November, i was busy banging the s**t out of the chick with the tightest ass on the block…probably the same girl that you later went home and fantasized about while you rage-pounded your junk in your dark, one bedroom apartment….

  • sylvia says:

    You can’t accept proof in front of you…But you really, truly believed that an atom can explode and create enough matter to make every galaxy (to many to count, which by the way can’t actually be proven). Tell me , scientifically how dose energy ever make matter?, and why can’t you think outside the box?

  • joe says:

    Wow

    Lloyd Pye asked me to introduce him to the Directors of a bio tech firm I have shares in……….he wants them to examine the skull and investigate its “Proteins” for commercial applications………he is a mad man

  • Finn says:

    Dear Jon,

    Perhaps your time would be better spent writing about yourself on a dating site? There you could talk about how much money you make, and perhaps try to make a porn movie.

    Your words speak for themselves. Thanks for the chuckle.

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.