The (in)famous alien skulls and the big cover-up

I am posting the photos of the alien skull found in 2003 in Bulgaria.
The Bulgarian guy holding the skull on the photo is the one who found it while he was hiking in the Rodopa mountain (South Bulgaria).
On the first photo he is holding a book published after the discovery of an identical skull in 2002.
The first skull was found in the same area.
The book contains detailed photos of the first skull along with chemical analysis results and measurements.









There are two theories about the origins of the two skulls.
First theory - these are the skulls of alien, extra-terrestrial beings.
Second theory - the skulls are of sheep.

Doesn't reallylook like sheep skulls! I can notice six holes in the middle of it, a sheep does not have these! I can guess that the top and middle one's COULD be for eyes or the nose, but the one's atc the bottom, what are they for?

Have u read this book? Does it say anything about wat the chemical analayis said or the opionons of any other scientists? Also is it not possible to be able to take D.N.A from that bones to see wat animal it really is, im no expert but if it is possible wouldnt that be an easier way of comfirming wat it is!?

That does not look like the front facial part of any skull. It looks like the area that would attach to the spine or a bone from another area of the body. My opinion is that it is not an alien skull.

Could it be a dinosaur skull of some sort? reptillian maybe to stick with the alien theory.

Doesn't really look like a Grey with the ridges and such, definitly not a sheep.

I'd like some more info on how this find was "covered up". Was it the government? Has this book been suppressed? Don't leave us hanging with a teaser in the title, and then give no info or links

FWIW, it looks more like a vertebra than a skull to me. The ridges around the edges definitely have the appearance of a backbone of some type. Also, the very flat area around the "eyes" looks too sharp for a skull. You can see how another vertebra would fit right up against it.

If there are holes in the back of the "skull", I would definitely say it's a vertebra. I notice there are no pictures where you can see the back of the skull clearly. Any better photos available?

[edit on 11/20/2005 by eaglewingz]

Hum,

Most everything I can find leads to a tripod.com site, or an as of yet found article in a turkish newspaper as the original information about this. I also dont understand why DNA analysis is taking so long.

I did find a site with more pics though.







Edit image links

[edit on 11/20/05 by makeitso]

I posted this in a skunkworks thread but it's relevant to this topic also.star child project

ARTISTIC RENDERING
Images by Greg Ruhl. (copyright) 2003 GUM LLC. All rights reserved.

Based on the discovery of this fossil.


The basic rebuttal to this theory (so far as i'm aware) is that the skull is that of a human with a genetic condition or deformity. Here's a related site you may find interesting.

The Starchild Debate - from the photographs the child's skull appears to exhibit a mild case of hydrocephaly. This condition is sometimes known as "water on the brain," and in about a quarter of cases is probably congenital; the remainder originate from prenatal development, perinatal trauma, or as a result of post-natal infection Bari Hooper

That statement is directly addressed on that page, which will give you a pretty good handle on the pro and con sides of the debate. I would go with the deformed human explaination myself, but i'm not an authority...so it doesn't matter what i think.

But i don't believe this has been fully resolved yet. Tests are ongoing so far as i'm aware. There's certainly no solid de-bunking of the Starchild (alien) hypothesis yet...atleast i haven't seen it. Although it is my opinion that there will be a "natural" explaination...there isn't (a complete) one yet.

Here's a photo of the rear of the "skull". As I thought, it is not solid. Notice how the area around the rear hole matches the flatness of the front. That's where the other vertebra would fit to make the spine.

Any paleontologist would identify this as a vertebra in an instant, I'm quite sure.

Originally posted by eaglewingz
[Here's a photo of the rear of the "skull". As I thought, it is not solid. Notice how the area around the rear hole matches the flatness of the front. That's where the other vertebra would fit to make the spine.

Any paleontologist would identify this as a vertebra in an instant, I'm quite sure.

Found this which says the skull is actually that of a cow.

Using a young cow's skull, by force, he accelerated the normal process of breaking the skull (naturally this happens for a year or so after the death of the cow) and received as a result an exact copy of the mysterious skull. This TV show took place after the first skull was found in 2001. End of Mystery!

But if you really want to see some cool stuff check out this site: www.burlingtonnews.net...

Was There a Race of People that Had Horns?
Could this just be another coverup by our archeological societies?


Things that make ya go Hmmmmm.

I've seen the horned skull before but I don't think its been debuinked yet. Isn't it on display in a museum somewhere?

There are still cases of people and animals growing horns. Google it and there are some odd cases (ABout.com is good too but takes a while to find).
There was a guy who had a horn growing out of his, well, 'horn' (if you take my meaning) Must have been painful.

If you go to the Ripley's Believe it or Not museums they have some really weird skeletal and skull formations. Maybe this is a really weird mutation or just damaged so badly that it looks mutated...

Just a thought.

It would be sweet if it was alien.

Yuriko

[edit on 20-11-2005 by Yuriko Oyama]

Originally posted by Rren
But if you really want to see some cool stuff check out this site: www.burlingtonnews.net...

Was There a Race of People that Had Horns?
Could this just be another coverup by our archeological societies?


Things that make ya go Hmmmmm.

This can be explained, as well.
I have no access to the entire article/study. It requires a password, etc.
Human Horns: A Historical Review and Clinical Correlation.

CONCLUSION: With the lack of either photographic or extreme dry specimen evidence of such human horns, we would propose that benign calvarial tumors, such as osteomas, may have initiated speculation that such entities, i.e., horns, exist in humans but that scalp lesions, exaggeration, legend, and religious beliefs have historically propagated these entities to a mythical status. In addition, early surgical intervention and changes in nomenclature may have also decreased the frequency of such sightings. Finally, many early descriptions have not been repeated in recent history, even in third-world countries lacking advanced medical care.

Another medical journal mention, which requires access to read the entire article/study:
Everard Home, John Hunter, and Cutaneous Horns: A Historical Review.

Abstract:
A cutaneous horn is a protrusion from the skin made up of cornified material. These horns can be derived from a variety of epidermal lesions, both benign and malignant. This historical article reviews a number of early instances of cutaneous horns, some reported in the 16th and 17th centuries. The Danish anatomist Thomas Bartholin was the first to have a correct theory of the ethiology of these horny growths, and the English surgeons John Hunter and Everard Home confirmed his findings in the late 18th century.

Furthermore, there is no London Museum? Perhaps they meant the Museum of London? At any rate, I am checking into that. I did check The British Museum, being I thought it was or may be the London Museum reference, and in doing so, they have no listing for the burlingtonnews.net horned skull they assert is on current display at the London Museum.
Spreadsheet detailing the human remains in the collection of the British Museum





seekerof

[edit on 20-11-2005 by Seekerof]

u wont find that skull because it was stolen...

Human skulls with horns were discovered in a burial mound at Sayre, Bradford County, Pennsylvania, in the 1880's. Horny projections extended two inches above the eye-brows, and the skeletons were seven feet tall, but other than that were anatomically normal. It was estimated that the bodies had been buried around A.D. 1200. The find was made by a reputable group of antiquarians, including the Pennsylvania state historian and dignitary of the Presbyterian Church (Dr. G.P. Donehoo) and two professors, A.B. Skinner, of the American Investigating Museum, and W.K.Morehead, of Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. The bones were sent to the American Investigating Museum in Philadelphia, where they were later claimed to have been stolen and have never been seen again

who by ? who knows


[edit on 20-11-2005 by Arawn]

Originally posted by eaglewingz
I'd like some more info on how this find was "covered up". Was it the government? Has this book been suppressed? Don't leave us hanging with a teaser in the title, and then give no info or links

I apologize.
I started with the explanations on the two theories about the skull's origin but I didn't finish it up. I am sorry, my mistake.
The whole thing turned out to be an ordinary hoax (not an intentional one, though).
It is not a vertebra. It is a wrecked sheep/goat/horse skull.
Several months after the discovery a crew of journalists shot on film a short documentary. They showed an animal skull (it was a sheep skull, I believe but it could have been a goat skull as well). Then they cracked it and one of the pieces looked exactly like the alien skull from the pictures above. They also instructed people how exactly to crack an animal skull so they could make themselves a nice "alien skull ashtray".
It seems that the guy who found the alien skull was fortunate enough to find a cracked sheep skull.
I don't have the book about the first alien skull but I know that it contains rather interesting info about its origins (several scientists wrote articles in it claiming that its structure is completely unknown and that the skull most probably belonged to an extra-terrestrial being)

Originally posted by The_Guy
I am posting the photos of the alien skull found in 2003 in Bulgaria.
The Bulgarian guy holding the skull on the photo is the one who found it while he was hiking in the Rodopa mountain (South Bulgaria).
On the first photo he is holding a book published after the discovery of an identical skull in 2002.
The first skull was found in the same area.
The book contains detailed photos of the first skull along with chemical analysis results and measurements.

There are two theories about the origins of the two skulls.
First theory - these are the skulls of alien, extra-terrestrial beings.
Second theory - the skulls are of sheep.

Ack - sorry about that first mis-post. Still getting used to the way these forums are laid out. >_<

Anyway, being an experienced artist and having a collection of animal skulls with which I work, I'd have to probably go with the sheep skull theory.

Obviously, it's not the whole sheep skull, or else you'd have an elongated snout, etc. Rather, I think this is a fractured skull (you can actually see that there are areas with damage), and that what he is presenting as the "frontal" view, is actually the rear of the skull - the holes being where the nerves of the spine connect to the brain, etc. If I had a look at the other side of the skull that would probably help determine exactly what EARTHLY creature this was, but I seriously doubt that this is any kind of extraterrestrial.

If anyone is still interested in this topic, please U2U me.

I know that men, I had even the chance to see and hold the skull. I contacted an friend and author, Andreas v. Retyi and he helped me preparing an investigation of the skull in Germany, but the guy and the skull "disappeared" shortly before I had to receive a sample.

All I have left about this case are some photographs, IR scans and a chemical analysis of the skull. I closed my investigation, because the disappearance of R. shocked me back then in 2002.

It's a long story and I am still not quite sure if I want to tell it, but I am willing to share the hi-res pictures and analyst.

As proof, I will upload now a picture and edit my post shortly.







[edit on 29/7/08 by absente]

I have to side with the 'I believe its a hoax' crowd on this one...

I saw a symiler thing that someone else mentioned here... Its a normal animal's skull (such as a cow) where the snout area was removed or became detached. You are basically seeing an incomplete animal skull...

reply to post by bobbyt

Very interesting "partial skull " some kind of wild sheep?

[img][URL=http://img519.imageshack.us/my.php?image=partialsn8.jpg]

Weird...
Some have told me it's a horse head... Sealand skull , starchild skull and all the "elongated" skulls (which in fact are not elongated... = those without the sagittal suture... ) The sum of all details... We are many people here on earth. We are (I suppose) the only species that think we're alone...