It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
reply to post by KILL_DOGG
It was not my intent to deflect this thread, but ...
So then, the evidence I collected and presented is all BS? Both of my parents, and therefore me, have no Haplogroup, at least not on Earth. Perhaps you should get ALL the facts before you put your foot in your mouth.
And, as for the spelling ... ever notice how the "s" and "d" keys are next to each other on your keyboard? (wonder what that means?)
As for the Starchild skull. You have no proof that it suffered from any human desease, you have no evidence that it was purely human. Might try keeping you ill-informed opinion to yourself until all the cards are dealt.
[edit on 26-3-2010 by AnthraAndromda]
Originally posted by KILL_DOGG
Where is this evidence that you claim? Posting a bunch of numbers built into HTML tables is not evidence. At what lab were the samples tested and verified? Where is the certification for the authenticity of the results? Who took the samples? I want pics of the actual results, certification, lab information, date, time, etc. That might be some evidence. You are seriously in need of some psychiatric assistance.
And so I'm not completely off topic, Starchild is so bogus. There are no aliens here, nor have the ever been. Deal with it and let the poor deformed kid rest in peace.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
Just so ya know, Infraredman, I'm not a hybrid. I'm not even sure I "buy into" the idea of Human - Alien hybrids. Though, I am sure some alien species may be able to cross with Humans, but, I'd also say that they are very few and genetically so "Human like " it would be difficult for you to notice the difference.
By-the-way ... I now have mother's mtDNA ... she has no haplogroup ... just like father.
Originally posted by hisshadow
I'd just like to say that for all the pics of deformed human skulls, none of them match the starchild skull.
they are ballooned in parts, and normal in others, moist all have nasal cavitys and correct eye sockets.. i've not seen one skull deformaty that can compare to the starchild skull.
the skull itself doesnt look deformed, it looks formed, which includes a missing nasal cavity and those odd eye sockets look normal for the skull as well.
Anyone else feel this way?
Yes - Anyone, who has actually taken the time to study the skull and Pye's findings have come to the same conclusions. It is NOT a deformity - Period.
actually taken the time to study the skull and Pye's findings...
...and our informed opinion is that he is unable, either intellectually or delusionally, to accept the rational explanations of the Starchild Skull. He insists we're a product of alien intervention. He even claims Bigfoot as the only 'hominoid' on Earth to have evolved without alien intervention.
Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by Kandinsky
Deal. Let's get it on. I love a good bet.
Originally posted by Carambaz
The starchild is indeed a mysterious subject of interest but I'm afraid that no matter how intense and passionate both believers and skeptics feel about this subject, it will ultimately be futile to be able to reach a mutual agreement between both parties as to what exactly the true nature of this being is.
Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by InfaRedMan
I'll accept that, peer reviewed. Or, to that end, anything that passifies the members of this board.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Originally posted by Carambaz
The starchild is indeed a mysterious subject of interest but I'm afraid that no matter how intense and passionate both believers and skeptics feel about this subject, it will ultimately be futile to be able to reach a mutual agreement between both parties as to what exactly the true nature of this being is.
You seem to suggest that the true nature of this object depends on a mutual agreement of the believers and skeptics on this board. I don't see it that way.
DNA can be very conclusive if good DNA samples are found. With a 900 year old artifact this might be difficult but not impossible.
And I would say i's not what the believers and skeptics on this board conclude that matters as much as the mainstream peer reviewed scientific conclusions.
Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by InfaRedMan
I'll accept that, peer reviewed. Or, to that end, anything that passifies the members of this board.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I know you communicate personally with Pye via e-mail, has Pye provided you with any updates on how soon he expects he might release any information? Or could we still be waiting a year from now?
[edit on 31-3-2010 by Arbitrageur]
...our geneticist is recovering more samples to be absolutely certain he can defend his work against mainstream critics, who will try their best to cast doubt on everything he produces. Mainstreamers must always do whatever they can think of to defeat anyone who challenges one of their zealously defended paradigms. They play very serious hardball.
As for me, I'm looking for an investor to provide the several million dollars we need to pay for recovering the Starchild's entire genome, a detailed analysis of it, especially the parts not found on Earth, filming all the scientific work being done, and producing a topnotch documentary film about it.
Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by SquirrelNutz
You're post is hard to differentiate from Pye's. Meh.
It's called 'peer review.' It's equivalent to the adversarial process of Western Law Courts. Pye likes to imply there's some guarded self-defence intrinsic to science.