Aliens HAVE visited earth - Finally... tangible evidence

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

In 2003 we had a DNA analysis that used human-only primers to recover the Starchild's mitochondrial DNA, the DNA outside the nucleus, which comes from the mother and her genetic line. That meant its mother was human. But we could not recover its nuclear DNA, which comes from both mother and father, which meant its father was not a human.

Sadly he bleated initially that the skull was fully alien...lol

You see that last sentence just shows the silliness of PYE.
If they were unable to extract father's DNA does not equate to a Alien Hybrid.
Firstly there is Human DNA found , period. Therefore it is human. Mitochondrial DNA is from earth, no arguments, no debates, this was found.
Lets address (again sigh~ ) the lack of fraternal DNA, this is simple. The Fraternal DNA decays, no remains of it whatsoever over this period of time. The above statement by PYE "which meant its father was not a human" IS so outlandish and ludicrous, a rubbish childish premise.

AND HERE IS THE CRUX:
Mitochondria, tiny "power-stations" of the cell exist outside of the nucleus and have their own DNA. There's over 1000 more mitochondrial DNA than nuclear DNA in our cells, so it's much easier to find. in any old bones the nuclear DNA is nearly always gone or very likely to be contaminated by modern DNA. If the nuclear is not there, its not because its Alien, its because its the male side and always degenerates first so you cant find it.

So they argue its a hybrid...you cant just shag an alien and get a hybrid especially with a being who has different nucleo peptide chaining . Homo sapiens we don't think were able even inter breed with Neanderthals. And we certainly cant breed with apes or chimps our closest ancestors.....

There are plenty of child skulls from the archaeological record that have no nuclear DNA either as it decays, but as this one has the "traditional alien look" he claims it is from a hybrid. A hydro cephalic skull is an example of what could have deformed the skull, and I lean towards this being a child with Progeria. The Skull is made up 100% of mammalian bone. So what is PYE suggesting was alien in this child? The brain only? They managed to get brain in there that was alien, and keep the skeletal structure 100% human?

In order for it to house a "alien" brain, its skeletal structure would need to be of extraterrestrial material, not human. We have mapped the entire human genome and there is no "rules to allow a alien brain" in the formation calcium hydroxyapatite (skull material).

Lets look at this child's environment, it didn't live like a alien, she was from halpogroupC, Indigenous to the region.....so an alien came and planted its brain in a human child skeletal frame then flew away and left it to be a nomadic wanderer that died at 5, the same kind of mortality age as a child with Progeria?

I look forward to the peer reviewed paper from the Geneticist, and PYEs previous results are peer reviewed at comic con.




[edit on 19-3-2010 by zazzafrazz]

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

 

G'day again VneZonyDostupa

Do you think anybody else here is reading the info we've posted?

:shk: :shk: :shk:

Yes and thanks to you and VneZonyDostupa for the research. I was thinking binding at first, it’s similar to this, the Peruvian skull:
www.eclipsconsult.com...
But I guess the lack of sinuses point more to a deformation of some type.

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Originally posted by Telos

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Critical thinking is only unpopular with those who are incapable of it.

IRM

Well I didn't ask for your opinion and i could care less if you agree or disagree.

Nor could I care less if you asked for my opinion or not. That's not how the board works and your not the gatekeeper of opinions.

My concern was in general due to the fact that this board has been inundated with a lot of negative posting in the last months.

Your concern was clearly that there are too many skeptics at ATS, hence the 'Skeptic Magazine' comment. Here's my perspective whether you asked for it or not...

The board is inundated with more poppycock each day. We live in a virtual avalanche of unsubstantiated, fantasy prone, delusional BS here that only serves to mask the real phenomena.

Most of the negative and aggressive posting comes from the believer crowd. Go back and re-read this thread if you want to see where the personalized attacks (the truly negative posting) and general bitterness are coming from.

There are some very fragile people here who cannot stand alternative opinions to their own. I say to them - "Get Over It"! "Grow A Pair"!

So I'm sorry to stop your enthusiasm in shaping the "real truth" but you misunderstood my reply.

You do nothing to stop my enthusiasm. Check your ego and stop patting yourself on the back mate. I completely understood your post and your subsequent reply verifies that.

It just looks like you have a case of sour grapes!

IRM

[edit on 19/3/10 by InfaRedMan]

That's your so called irony? I thought you could do better. Again, you didn't understand my posts and your reply just confirmed that. I can repeat it though, i don't mind: I wasn't referring just to this thread but in general. Was an observation and not a complain. Is not the skepticism that bothers me, actually I find it very healthy and keeps the dialog open and true. Is the bashing, negativity and especially the nihilism that ruins threads like that. Hence the Skeptic Magazine comment because my opinion about that BS is as such. And staying always to the observation, nobody should assume the position of the so called debunker only for the mere of doing it. Besides, as far as I can remember we've communicated in the past and I've shown my position in this board not to be fooled by everything is written or desperate to believe. I'm not ok with the method but not with the criticism. So please save me those insinuations.

p.s. Enthusiasm should have been "enthusiasm". Next time I'll try to be more simple.

Took this from Wikipedia

Trace Genetics was not able to recover useful lengths of nuclear DNA or Y-chromosomal DNA for further testing, so it remains unclear if the Starchild's father is infact, human.[7]

Originally posted by hectorsmith
Took this from Wikipedia

Trace Genetics was not able to recover useful lengths of nuclear DNA or Y-chromosomal DNA for further testing, so it remains unclear if the Starchild's father is infact, human.[7]

Yes and that could have been entered by PYE himself.

PLs read the top post on this page explaining how the absence of nuclear DNA in ancient skulls is actually common

[edit on 19-3-2010 by zazzafrazz]

reply to post by Pauligirl


G'day Pauligirl

I agree with you on both counts

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

Originally posted by Iamrealistic
this is not an alien...it is a human with a disease...tests a decade ago proved that the child had both Y and X chromosomes...X from mom and Y from dad (both human) case closed

Incorrect. Read the article go to his website.

please provide such an explantion, as this thread is most certainly a place to present such contraversial evidence which states otherwise....

Its not alien, simple as that. This is sidesshow nonsense.
Why not allow mainstream science to study it?
They can find out all kinds of things about otzi the iceman 5300 yo
they dont assume hes ET.
But a deformed 900yo skull must be proof? People beleive what they WANT TO BELEIVE!

en.wikipedia.org...

Based on a study that used a small part of Otzi's mtDNA, many people came to believe they are his descendants. But a recent study (October 2008) that analyzed his complete mtDNA sequence suggests that he has no living descendants...as far as we now know.

Must be ET, better come up with a new Con mr Pye

www.mummytombs.com...

Unlike nuclear DNA (which contains genetic information from both parents and which deteriorates rather rapidly after death), mtDNA lasts much longer

[edit on 20-3-2010 by wayaboveitall]

reply to post by wayaboveitall


G'day wayaboveitall

Well that would solve it.....

Let a group of conventional scientists, forensic anatomists, pathologists, anthropologists, etc....study it.

I agree completely

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
Pye's been trawling this thing around for years and years. It's already been seen by mainstream scientists and they've described it as a *typical* deformed human skull. The DNA tests have proven its maternal and paternal lineage.

Pye admits all this in the Paracast show (2007) I linked earlier. He just doesn't accept anything he's told. There isn't any reason he'd change now.

reply to post by Kandinsky


G'day Kandinsky

Thanks for clarifying that.....in my reading I did not pick up the fact it has been examined by more conventional experts. I thought their commentary was made "from a distance".

As I've been stating, I believe the evidence points strongly towards the cause of the abnormal development being Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndrome.

I wonder if the more conventional experts arrived at that conclusion?

Based on the Wiki entries, it seems they might have done exactly that.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 20-3-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
You might have a point with the HGP explanation....maybe...maybe not. I favour brachycephaly and explained somewhat...earlier post.

Pye's pseudoMcQuackery is such that I wouldn't be surprised if he has 'chapter & verse' identifications stored under his stairs.

reply to post by Kandinsky


G'day Kandinsky

I'm with you in the sense that it's a skull that has developed abnormally via one of these conditions.....as opposed to the "alien" option.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 20-3-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

Originally posted by TravisT
OK, enough is enough!!!! Not only has VneZonyDostupa put more then enough information to show that the article/theory isn't even credible, but we have the OP(Squirrel Nutz), who hasn't even engaged in a debate with VneZonyDostupa. Why is Squirrel Nutz dodging the issue? If he feels so strongly about how much "evidence" there is about ET life, then please, do all of the believers, and your sorry thread a chance, and debate actual issues, instead of quoting people who say "yeah, ET's are real", and then saying how much you agree.

Squirrel Nutz, why can't you debate actual facts and issues with VneZonyDostupa? He has contributed more to this thread, and has given the most insight, then any member here, and yet, you keep dodging him. Why is that?

[edit on 19-3-2010 by TravisT]

Why would *I* debate? I'm just another ameteur enthusiast, and would only be debating with other ameteurs. I am not the expert, I am only posting the findings, and addressing points I see that he has already refuted - research yourself, or go to Lloyd Pye's site, contact the man, and debate the topic with the source? He'll respond.

After the first 3 pages, I emailed him the link, and already heard back...

Scott:

Any request for funding alternative research never goes over well with mainstream sycophants, even though every mainstream scientist rabidly seeks out their next infusion of grant money. What an incredible double-standard those jerks live by! And for what it's worth, this is only the SECOND time I've asked for help from my mailing list in the past six years. I got $1200 a few weeks ago, the geneticist has burned through that, and now he needs more. So sue me.....

As for the arguments about the DNA test that said the Starchild carried an X and Y chromosome, that was carried out in late 1999 and has since been proved to be done by incompetents who arrived at a completely wrong answer. And Wikipedia won't allow the posting of ANY accurate information relating to ANY alternative subjects because they are such sniveling toadies for the mainstream's views. When anyone tries to get accurate alternative information anywhere onto Wiki, the Wiki boneheads inform us that they know our subjects better than we do, so they refuse to change anything. It's the worst kind of irresponsible (if not illegal) runaround you can imagine. We just try not to worry about it because we definitely can't get a fair shake from them.

As for our "mystery" geneticist, he wants to finish the work he has to do to nail it down without mainstream naysayers tyring to dismiss his results before they're even formalized. He'll do that in another two or three weeks. But he already has enough proof to go public, which I did. He just has to double and triple his evidence so exactly the kinds of knee-jerk defenders of the mainstream faith who keep commenting on the string will be cut off at the knees before they can get their dudgeon cranked up into a higher-than-normal degree of pique...... ;-)

(You can post this if you like.)

-Lloyd

I'm already looking through old emailers to see where he's addressed Progeria and other deformities - pretty sure I've read on his site about these. I'll post when I find.



[edit on 3/20/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

reply to post by SquirrelNutz
That's good work asking Pye directly for his position here. I'd applaud you if I could

Nevertheless, Pye's assertions haven't changed at all over the years. His email quote has several points that underline his attitude towards science. His terms are pretty emotional and dismissive. The quote that I think says most about his Starchild Skull is...

As for the arguments about the DNA test that said the Starchild carried an X and Y chromosome, that was carried out in late 1999 and has since been proved to be done by incompetents who arrived at a completely wrong answer.

It's been the 'completely wrong answer' ever since he first took the skull to his local doctor and asked them to look at it. The 'wrong' answer is 'Lloyd, it's human.' Until one scientist says it's an alien skull, Pye will continue to despise them and keep looking for the 'right' answer....

nice thread some good info

nice info thanks for posting

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

Why would *I* debate? I'm just another ameteur enthusiast, and would only be debating with other ameteurs. I am not the expert, I am only posting the findings, and addressing points I see that he has already refuted - research yourself, or go to Lloyd Pye's site, contact the man, and debate the topic with the source? He'll respond.

After the first 3 pages, I emailed him the link, and already heard back...

Why would you debate? You made a thread that said *PROOF* of alien visitation, and now you're telling us you're an amateur, and don't even really have a full understand of the subject? Even the finding by Pye aren't conclusive, which is a little misleading to the title of this thread that you made. This isn't proof, this is just someone who thinks there is proof, and is dismissing any other scientist telling him otherwise, by calling them "incompetents".

By the way, if you actually believe Pye, then how much have you donated?

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by SquirrelNutz

 

That's good work asking Pye directly for his position here. I'd applaud you if I could

Nevertheless, Pye's assertions haven't changed at all over the years. His email quote has several points that underline his attitude towards science. His terms are pretty emotional and dismissive. The quote that I think says most about his Starchild Skull is...

As for the arguments about the DNA test that said the Starchild carried an X and Y chromosome, that was carried out in late 1999 and has since been proved to be done by incompetents who arrived at a completely wrong answer.

It's been the 'completely wrong answer' ever since he first took the skull to his local doctor and asked them to look at it. The 'wrong' answer is 'Lloyd, it's human.' Until one scientist says it's an alien skull, Pye will continue to despise them and keep looking for the 'right' answer....

I hear what you're basically saying: "He's just going around, asking the same questions, until he gets the answer that he wants to hear" - that about the gist of what you're getting at?

I don't believe this to be the case at all. What's going on here is, keep searching for people/opportunities to get the definitive answer thru actual, testable, scientific method.

He's just been waiting for the right opportunity this whole time - it seems his wait is over.

______________________

Originally posted by TravisT

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

Why would *I* debate? I'm just another ameteur enthusiast, and would only be debating with other ameteurs. I am not the expert, I am only posting the findings, and addressing points I see that he has already refuted - research yourself, or go to Lloyd Pye's site, contact the man, and debate the topic with the source? He'll respond.

After the first 3 pages, I emailed him the link, and already heard back...

Why would you debate? You made a thread that said *PROOF* of alien visitation, and now you're telling us you're an amateur, and don't even really have a full understand of the subject? Even the finding by Pye aren't conclusive, which is a little misleading to the title of this thread that you made. This isn't proof, this is just someone who thinks there is proof, and is dismissing any other scientist telling him otherwise, by calling them "incompetents".

By the way, if you actually believe Pye, then how much have you donated?

That's a little personal, but suffice it to say... 1 week's $alary (and, I don't work at Burger King) Best I can do - but, we all know you were thinking $0, right? Sorry to disappoint

reply to post by SquirrelNutz

He's just been waiting for the right opportunity this whole time - it seems his wait is over.

A wager? In his email to you he suggests the results are ready in 2 to 3 weeks. If these new lab results offer convincing evidence that the skull isn't wholly human in origin...I'll change my avatar or carry a signature of your choosing for a month. Naturally, you'll do likewise if you accept

After all these years has his fairytale come to an end? The glass slipper has found its foot....Pye has finally found a guy to agree with him.

So how about it? A wager?