posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 09:47 PM
I do not take their “unexplainable” claim at face value. The authors never directly consider congenital hydrocephalus as a possible explanation,
although they dismiss it along with a long list of natural deformities. Hydrocephalus literally means “water on the brain,” and results from a
blockage in the normal flow of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from where it is made inside the brain to the space surrounding the brain and spinal cord
where it is reabsorbed. As a result of the blockage, CSF builds up inside the brain, pushing outward on the brain and skull. Because in young children
the bones of the skull have not yet fused together, the skull is free to enlarge to accommodate this buildup of fluid.
If a child suffered from untreated hydrocephalus until age four or five, their skull would display distortions in almost every feature. All of the
proper bones, prominences, holes, and sutures would be present, as they are in the Starchild skull, but they would be deformed and displaced. This is
exactly what we find in the Starchild skull
What about their confident prediction that DNA testing will prove the child was alien? Well, a DNA sample was taken from the skull, and was subjected
to DNA probes designed to detect sequences of DNA that are unique to humans (performed by Dr. David Sweet, Director of the Bureau of Legal Dentistry
at the University of British Columbia)5. The Starchild skull DNA was found to contain both an X and a Y chromosome. This is 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.
In view of such evidence, Pye and Bean can reasonably be expected to abandon their alien hypothesis, if they were genuine scientists. However, their
website continues to support an alien interpretation of the Starchild, and this is what they have to say about the DNA evidence
reference Steven Novella, MD
2/17/2006
[edit on 21-1-2008 by luxor311]