New Study: Top 5 Characteristics of Real Alien Cone Head Skulls

The controversy over cone head skulls has been raging for many years. On one side are the naysayers. These people attribute all cone head skulls to the practice of artificial cranial deformation. And, they are right in many cases. On the other side are those who maintain that, while some cone head skulls are artificially deformed, others are authentically non-human and likely of alien origin.

This article offers the TOP 5 characteristics of real alien cone head skulls that can enable you to quickly dispel or support any claim of proposed alien authenticity.

With each method are visual examples to help clarify the differences between human and proposed alien skulls. There are also new links to more detailed pages on this topic.

Special thanks goes to Brien Foerster, renowned expert on the topic of alien cone head skulls, who gave me permission to use some of his findings in this article.


#1 Alien Cone Head Skulls Are Found Around The World
More than two hundred cone head skulls are known to exist and have already been excavated from sites in Bolivia, Ecuador, Iraq, Malta, Melanesia, Mexico, North America, Peru, and Siberia. The majority of these skulls date to 1000-2000 years ago (around 945 A.D. to 1308 A.D.) However, many have been removed from public display in museums. A coordinated effort to hide the truth of their origins? Maybe.

More detail here: Alien Cone Head Skulls Details



#2 Alien Cone Head Skulls Don’t Have Cranial Scarring
The practice of artificial cranial deformation involved wrapping the head of babies with wooden boards or twine. The presence of this persistent pressure causes swelling, bulging and permanent scarring on the subjects. Real alien cone head skulls don’t have scarring since it is believed their DNA naturally causes the shape of their head. I propose the theory people deformed children to resemble the elite ruling class of true aliens present in these civilizations at the time.

More detail here: Alien Cone Head Skull Shape



#3 Alien Cone Head Skulls Have 25% More Cranial Volume
The cranial volume of these skulls is more than 25% larger than human skull volume. That means the brains of these subjects were also 25% larger than human brains. Normal human skulls from the Inca time period have 1100-1200 cm3 of cranial volume. Cranial deformed skulls from the Inca time period, although somewhat elongated in shape, have the same cranial volume as a non-deformed human skull. The true alien cone head skulls have 1500 cm3 volume (significantly more than a human.)

More detail here: Alien Cone Head Skull Cranial Volume



#4 Alien Cone Head Skulls Have 2 Small Holes In The Top Of The Head
This method is, perhaps, the easiest and fastest way to distinguish between a human and proposed alien skull. True alien cone head skulls have two small holes in the top of the head. Medical researchers have no explanation for this oddity. Human skulls simply don’t have these holes. The only holes similar to this in a human skull appear in our brow line. Nerves that control muscle movement in our face and forehead extend through 2 holes similar to these holes. Did these aliens have elaborate muscles in the top of their heads? Or, were they used for other purposes unknown to us?

More detail here: Alien Cone Head Skull 2 Small Holes



#5 Alien Cone Head Skulls Have Only 2 Cranial Plates
The human skull has 3 major bones (plates) that comprise the spherical shape of the skull. They are the frontal bone, the parietal bones (left and right hemispheres). (I’m leaving out all the other smaller bones in this comparison). The main difference in cone head skulls is the ones believed to be truly alien in origin have only two major skull bones. Still others have four skull bones. In both cases, this differs from human skulls. This difference cannot be attributed to cranial deformation. Wrapping the skull at infancy to change its shape cannot change the genetic makeup of human skull bones. Again, this is a natural occurrence as directed by the being’s DNA.

More detail here: Alien Cone Head Cranial Plates

Other differences are present in alien cone head skulls that are different from human skulls such as:

Greater Bone Density
Larger Eye Sockets, Jaw Bones and Teeth
Location of the Foramen Magnum
Variations in Size and Shape

However, these may take a more professional examination to understand. Recent DNA testing on cone head skulls in the Paracus region of Peru are showing to be non-human :

“Whatever the sample labeled 3A has came from – it had mtDNA with mutations unknown in any human, primate or animal known so far. The data are very sketchy though and a LOT of sequencing still needs to be done to recover the complete mtDNA sequence. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample 3A indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature…” – Brein Foester

I feel it is important to also mention the Star Child project in this article. Many of the well-read members of ATP already know about this amazing skull, found in Mexico, that has undergone the most comprehensive DNA testing of any proposed alien skull. The findings are astounding. More on these DNA tests here:

Star Child Project - DNA Testing of Alien Skull

Now, whenever you see a new article about a cone head skull finding, or you see one in person in a museum, you can quickly identify for yourself and others its true origin: Human or…”other”.

- Kanu

The so called star child has been proved to be human

DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD (Bureau of Legal Dentistry), a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes."[2]

Further DNA testing in 2003 at Trace Genetics, which specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, isolated mitochondrial DNA from both recovered skulls. The child belongs to haplogroup C. Since mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively from the mother, it makes it possible to trace the offspring's maternal lineage. The DNA test therefore confirmed that the child's mother was a Haplogroup C human female. However, the adult female found with the child belonged to haplogroup A. Both haplotypes are characteristic Native American haplogroups, but the different haplogroup for each skull indicates that the adult female was not the child's mother

Perhaps some different cultures had different ways of cranial deformation. Therefore causing differences in the shapes.

Just a thought.

ETA: I do believe in the 'second humanoid species' on Earth theory. I do believe that 'second' humanoid species does have those elongated skull features.

Oh well, guess I am human then. There goes my chance of flying a UFO

reply to post by KanuTruth


We dont have to think that they are alien, they coud be from earth long time ago, i've seen the skulls closely. Anyway we are all alien, something from out of space provoked life on earth....

i find these interesting, but......
since there still no proof you can't really say whats an alien skull.
You can point to the anomalies and go "hmm?" but you cant really say these ARE alien.
i feel they should still be investigated scientifically.


im not a debunker, i do think its possible that we've been visited.
i hope one day that i know we've been visited.

Well presented thread, I did not know about the two holes in the tops of the skulls. Lots of interesting information, thank you. S&F for you! I tend to lean towards the real deal on this one, or even perhaps the second human species that has been brought up in a thread recently www.abovetopsecret.com... . Pretty interesting stuff that I hope the worlds PTB can get over the pettiness of things, and let us know exactly what our true history may be.

reply to post by KanuTruth


There is also Evidence from the Scientific Community that some of these Skull Cavities hold a 25 Percent Larger Brain Mass and are Unlike Any other examples of a Normally Defined Homo Sapien . To me , that is a Very Convincing Observation as to the Uniqueness of these Beings .



www.youtube.com...

Zanti Misfit
reply to post by KanuTruth

 

There is also Evidence from the Scientific Community that some of these Skull Cavities hold a 25 Percent Larger Brain Mass

Do you have a valid source got that claim?

reply to post by hellobruce


I refer you to my Link ...........

PhoenixOD
The so called star child has been proved to be human

DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD (Bureau of Legal Dentistry), a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes."[2]

Further DNA testing in 2003 at Trace Genetics, which specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, isolated mitochondrial DNA from both recovered skulls. The child belongs to haplogroup C. Since mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively from the mother, it makes it possible to trace the offspring's maternal lineage. The DNA test therefore confirmed that the child's mother was a Haplogroup C human female. However, the adult female found with the child belonged to haplogroup A. Both haplotypes are characteristic Native American haplogroups, but the different haplogroup for each skull indicates that the adult female was not the child's mother

Thanks for the tip. I'm going to check this out. Last I read, the mitochondrial DNA was, in fact, from a human woman. It was the father's Nuclear DNA that could not be matched to any existing DNA sequence on Earth (human, animal, insect, bacteria, etc.) This is the shocker - that the father may have been of alien origins and bred with the mother to create this hybrid....

However, I'll still check your references...

Zanti Misfit
I refer you to my Link ...........

So in fact no valid source for your claim! - Unless you think someone mentioning it in the comments is a valid source....

hellobruce

Zanti Misfit
reply to post by KanuTruth

 

There is also Evidence from the Scientific Community that some of these Skull Cavities hold a 25 Percent Larger Brain Mass

Do you have a valid source got that claim?

Refer to the video at the bottom of this page: (From Brein Foerster):
Video of Comparison: Human, Human Deformed and Authentic Cone Head Skull

KanuTruth

PhoenixOD
The so called star child has been proved to be human

DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD (Bureau of Legal Dentistry), a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes."[2]

Further DNA testing in 2003 at Trace Genetics, which specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, isolated mitochondrial DNA from both recovered skulls. The child belongs to haplogroup C. Since mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively from the mother, it makes it possible to trace the offspring's maternal lineage. The DNA test therefore confirmed that the child's mother was a Haplogroup C human female. However, the adult female found with the child belonged to haplogroup A. Both haplotypes are characteristic Native American haplogroups, but the different haplogroup for each skull indicates that the adult female was not the child's mother

Thanks for the tip. I'm going to check this out. Last I read, the mitochondrial DNA was, in fact, from a human woman. It was the father's Nuclear DNA that could not be matched to any existing DNA sequence on Earth (human, animal, insect, bacteria, etc.) This is the shocker - that the father may have been of alien origins and bred with the mother to create this hybrid....

However, I'll still check your references...

The question I have about this report is, "What happens to human DNA that is intentionally mutated in a genetics laboratory?" If it was intentionally mutated, over and over again, would the resulting DNA even be recognizable as human?

This is not an idle question. Most folks at ATS are probably aware that there are a number of ancient Sumerian texts suggesting that genetic manipulation of the human genome was evidently undertaken by the infamous Enki, who was known as Ea Nudimmud, 'The man fashioner' by the Babylonians.

The following Sumerian text reveals the rather caviler attitude Enki and his sidekick, Ninmah, had about messing around with human genetics.

etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk...#

The Greek myth, Jason and the Argonauts, speaks of the famous town of Colchis which was located near the SE corner of the Black Sea in present-day Georgia. In the myth, Colchis was referred to as both the graveyard and the birthplace of the immortal gods. To me this has always suggested the possibility that if cloning and other types of genetic manipulation actually took place in antiquity, then Colchis may have once served as a genetics laboratory.

Why Colchis? Out of all the places in the world, why would I suggest that Colchis may have once served as a genetics' laboratory?

Colchis is where the curious plant, Colchicum grows in abundance. Colchicine, an extract of the plant, is famously used as a cure for gout, and was even used in antiquity by the Egyptians, who suffered greatly from this painful disease.

But there is another use for Colchicine. I learned about it years ago when I read a book titled, "The Outer Space Connection" by Alan & Sally Landsburg which was published way back in 1975. On page 29 the authors described how colchicine was used in early animal cloning attempts to wipe the nucleus of an egg clean in order to prepare it for receiving new DNA material. While colchicine was found to be very effective in removing nuclear material from an egg, according to the Landsburgs, it also resulted in mutating the inserted DNA and was therefore "found unsuitable for cloning animals."

While colchicine may indeed be unsuitable when the goal is to create a carbon copy of the parent stock, it has apparently been found very useful when the goal is to produce MUTATED GENES, which essentially results in "new" genetic material.

"Since chromosome segregation is driven by microtubules, colchicine is also used for inducing polyploidy in plant cells duringcellular division by inhibiting chromosome segregation during meiosis; half the resulting gametes, therefore, contain no chromosomes, while the other half contain double the usual number of chromosomes (i.e., diploid instead of haploid, as gametes usually are), and lead to embryos with double the usual number of chromosomes (i.e., tetraploid instead of diploid). While this would be fatal in most higher animal cells, in plant cells it is not only usually well tolerated but in fact frequently results in plants that are larger, hardier, faster-growing, and in general more desirable than the normally diploid parents; for this reason, this type of genetic manipulation is frequently used in breeding plants commercially."

Source: en.wikipedia.org...

I suspect that if mutated human DNA was the actual goal, colchicine would be very useful, though it would probably require one or more additional steps to ensure that the resulting embryo would survive.

So I wonder, are the cone heads and the Grays really "alien" or do they just appear that way because the human DNA they may have started with has been purposefully mutated beyond recognition?

PhoenixOD
The so called star child has been proved to be human

DNA testing in 1999 at BOLD (Bureau of Legal Dentistry), a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, British Columbia found standard X and Y chromosomes in two samples taken from the skull, "conclusive evidence that the child was not only human (and male), but both of his parents must have been human as well, for each must have contributed one of the human sex chromosomes."[2]

Further DNA testing in 2003 at Trace Genetics, which specializes in extracting DNA from ancient samples, isolated mitochondrial DNA from both recovered skulls. The child belongs to haplogroup C. Since mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively from the mother, it makes it possible to trace the offspring's maternal lineage. The DNA test therefore confirmed that the child's mother was a Haplogroup C human female. However, the adult female found with the child belonged to haplogroup A. Both haplotypes are characteristic Native American haplogroups, but the different haplogroup for each skull indicates that the adult female was not the child's mother

And so, to you, this somehow disproves the OP and debunks all possibility of aliens? Nice strawman diversion, but you know darn well it doesn't. These elongated skulls lack very specific human morphological characteristcs. They're approaching the proof threshold that your career debunkers dread might one day come forth. Bummer, eh?

reply to post by Urantia1111

And so, to you, this somehow disproves the OP and debunks all possibility of aliens?

Nope, those are your words not mine..so you are arguing with your own self invented strawman argument.

Good luck with that lol.

Holy God!

Wouldnt squishing their baby brains with those boards give them brain damage or something?
(referring to the tiny pic in the op)

Riddles

The question I have about this report is, "What happens to human DNA that is intentionally mutated in a genetics laboratory?" If it was intentionally mutated, over and over again, would the resulting DNA even be recognizable as human?

Riddles,

I like your thought process here. I, too, am well read on the topic of Enki and Ninmah genetic experimentation to develop hybrids. I wrote about in on my web site with the same references to the Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature.
Accounts of Genetic Experimentation from Sumerian Texts

While I'm no genetic scientist, my thinking is this. Regardless of how our DNA is engineered, it results as "our" DNA. We call ourselves human and whatever the coding sequence is and how it came to be may never become truly clear. But, the fact is that we have cataloged DNA from "humans" animals, insects, bacteria, etc. The fact that the Nuclear DNA from the Starchild does not turn up matching anything is the shocker. If we don't know what the source of the DNA is, and we have cataloged all known human DNA, what does logic suggest?

Thanks for getting me thinking. And I'm going to look up that island.

Poppcocked
Holy God!

Wouldnt squishing their baby brains with those boards give them brain damage or something?
(referring to the tiny pic in the op)

Its done gradually in steps and i think they use something like coconut oil to soften up the skull and skin. Its claimed that there was no damage to the brain.

It was very wide spread practice in some parts of the world years ago. Not in the slightest bit rare.

The idea of the Peruvian skull as being naturally ‘flathead’...was discussed in the report of the Council of the American Antiquarian Association in 1855....It is not difficult to understand why the earlier inquirersfailed to grasp the fact of Peruvian artificial deforma-tion. The custom was so widespread, and the sites which attracted early attention provided such a mass of specimens, that the theory that such conformations were natural was easy of acceptance(16).

Among 500 skulls unearthed from Peru (ancient Inca) in themid-19th century housed in Paris and another similar number in the University Museum at Rome, only 10% did not show extraor-dinary skull deformations (16). Furthermore, 19th century studiesfrom France on living subjects found no evidence of brain injury or cognitive impairment associated with severe head shaping

If anyone is interested in real facts about skull deformation i urge them to read this paper
HISTORICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT IN DEFORMATIONAL PLAGIOCEPHALY

A,a Chinook cradleboard that Morton acquired from a friend.The neck of the child rested on the ridge to the right of the board (D).
C is a grass pad that was drawn over the child’s forehead. The other parts marked D
were for straps to keep the child’s body in place. The body rested on a mat of soft grass.
E is a support for the cradle or a step to raise the cra-dle head up in the air for easier lifting. According to Morton, children reportedly remained in such a cradle from 4 to 8 months, “or until the sutures of the skull have in some manner united, and the bone becomes solid and firm” (37). Morton wrote that “…so highly is this deformity val-ued among the Columbia River tribes, that their slaves (who are for the most part derived from the adjacent tribes) are not allowed to practice it.…[The] absolute internal capacity of the skull is not diminished, and,strange as it may seem, the intellectual facilities suffer nothing. The latter fact is proved by the concurrent testimony of all travelers who have writ-ten on the subject”

reply to post by PhoenixOD


The more recent findings concerning the Foxp2 gene says it is not even close to being human.