Finally, 13th Crystal Skull FOUND in Germany!

Originally posted by Invariance
...Just a little note to make sure we can keep out terms straight, seeing as how these skulls have been examined by every possible scientist that would be likely to figure anything out about them and seeing as how these skulls are ON DISPLAY at museums... but if out coffee table experts here at ATS are so convinced that they're fakes, I guess the scientists and museums are dead wrong and should be sued for misrepresentation...

...Whatever side of the fence you're on, I find it ironic that only now with all our advancements in science are they "debunking" the skulls that have been sitting in museums. They were examined and found to be amazing for all of this time and only now they're finding flaws in the idea? Sounds hinky, don't you think?

I gues you missed this comment by Smithsonian anthropologist Jane MacLaren Walsh posted earlier?

Crystal skulls are a fascinating example of artifacts that have made their way into museums with no scientific evidence to prove their rumored pre-Columbian origins,”

Mysterious Crystal Skull on Exhibit for the First Time at Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History

( coincidentally, Jane MacLaren Walsh is described one of the world’s pre-eminent experts on crystal skulls in the scientific community)

Jane MacLaren Walsh is an anthropologist and researcher at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. She is known for her role in exposing faked pre-Columbian artifacts. Notable cases she has investigated include crystal skulls alleged to have been of ancient Mesoamerican (usually Maya) origins...

...Walsh's interest in crystal skulls began with the anonymous delivery of one such object to the Smithsonian in 1992.

Jane MacLaren Walsh

Based weight of empirical evidence versus weight of speculative conjecture, I believe we can keep the terms straight and still safely conclude the skulls are a modern creation with a fraudulent provenance.

They make for a neat story but at the end of the day that's all the mysticism being projected on this subject adds up to be. A story...

Another thing i'd just like to point out about the skulls is...

All of them - if they are part of the "authentic" Crystal Skull set - The lower Jaw should be fully detachable. and able to be slotted back in with ease.


That was one of the things that stumped the people studying it as well - As the Detachable jaw bit - and the entire skull - Was made from 1 crystal. Meaning whoever made it - had some realy, realy funky crystal carving/cutting techniques ontop of the whole going against the axis thing.

Originally posted by TigaHawk
Another thing i'd just like to point out about the skulls is...

All of them - if they are part of the "authentic" Crystal Skull set - The lower Jaw should be fully detachable. and able to be slotted back in with ease.

That was one of the things that stumped the people studying it as well - As the Detachable jaw bit - and the entire skull - Was made from 1 crystal. Meaning whoever made it - had some realy, realy funky crystal carving/cutting techniques ontop of the whole going against the axis thing.

I would consider this bit from the Smithsonian link I posted above befor being "stumped" much longer...

A third generation of skull appears some time in 1933, when Sidney Burney, a London art dealer, acquired a crystal skull of nearly identical proportions to the Boban-Tiffany-British Museum specimen.

There is no information about where he got it, but he attempted to sell it to the American Museum of Natural History in February, 1933, saying that it was from Mexico. It is very nearly a replica of the British Museum skull, almost exactly the same size and shape, with more detailed modeling of the eyes and the teeth. It also has a separate mandible, which puts it in a class by itself.

In 1943, it was sold at Sotheby’s in London to F. A. Mitchell Hedges.

Since the 1954 publication of Mr. Mitchell Hedges’s memoir, Danger My Ally, this third generation, 20th-century skull has acquired a Mayan provenience, as well as a number of fantastic, Indiana Jones-like tall tales. Now variously known as the Skull of Doom, the Skull of Love, or simply the Mitchell-Hedges Skull, it is said to emit blue lights from its eyes, and has reputedly crashed computer hard drives.

Crystal Skulls History

It would seem there has been a lot of hyperbole masquerading as fact for some time regarding these "artifacts".

reply to post by realeyesrealiserealLies

This just goes to show how little you know. Cant argue with ignorance... I could, but it would be futile and a waste of time!

I do know you provided nothing to support these rather nitwit claims of water having memory. I've seen the stories making the claim. I have to say that the ice crystals shown were all ugly. The ones that form on my windows are much prettier.

You want to argue that CDs are holographic? Really? Show us instead of making personal attack.

You want to argue that DNA is a crystal? That's an ignorant claim as are the claims that crystals are the "Earth's DNA" Now that is ignorant.

reply to post by realeyesrealiserealLies

For anyone thinking that civilization is no older than 5000 years... sorry to bust your bubble

Sorry to see you were so easily taken in by a fraud. This so-called "spiritual archaeologist" that uses known fakes as part of his so-called evidence is just a huckster, a con-man, just a simple fraud.

And you didn't see this for yourself? You didn't check his claims? LOL

had been made of a whole crystal

www.youtube.com...

These crystals were found in Mexico. I'm sure there are quartz crystals somewhere of similar size.

reply to post by Canadianpride420

watching a documentary about it on the history channel and how there was a good handful of skulls that were made with such precision that they couldn't be replicated today

I've learned that the history channel is not a reputable outfit. Documentaries in general need to be tested just like the printed word. This claim sounds like hogwash. In fact I think that claim was hogwash 50 years ago. The Palomar mirror was polished to a greater precision than any of these corny crystal skulls.

reply to post by trusername

If a skull was found to be made with an advanced technology that doesn't fit the "timeline" we're all fed... best to say it's "fake".

What is so advanced about these skulls. Can you tell me what is supposed to be so precise? All I see is the sort of object I could find in any art shop.

reply to post by realeyesrealiserealLies

There is much ancient technology that hasn't been understood by modern/western science. Considering that the blueprints for those very "mini computers" may have their origin in Egypt!? Look up the temple of Horus. The word chemistry itself comes from Egypt which was orginally known by it's people as Kemet meaning black... So chemistry could be translated to black mystery/history.

This is another laughable claim. What ancient technology are you talking about? Is it the ancient plow? Or is the ancient chariot? Or the ancient ramp? Or the Archimedes screw?

Chemistry (etymology)
You seem to have messed up the origin of the word chemistry having taken it back to Egypt where the connections are tenuous at best. I suggest you read the link to see where you have made your error.

reply to post by topsykrets89

the only thing I find a little strange about them is the cutting against the grain

There is no "grain" to quartz. Break a piece and see that it breaks with a conchoidal fracture. There are no cleavage planes in quartz. I think this claim was made by some bumpkin.

reply to post by Invariance

Some of the skulls are believed to be between 5,000 and 36,000 years old.

A little problem with that is people were not here 36,000 years ago.

Mmm, that's not exactly 19th century, huh?

The claim is a baloney claim made by someone that apparently was unaware of the Clovis date or even of the oldest claimed dates for human habitation in the Americas, which predates Clovis and is being heavily studied today.

The most widely celebrated and mysterious crystal skull is the Mitchell-Hedges Skull

Did you know that although it was claimed to have been found in the 1920s in Belize it was in fact bought at auction in Sotheby's in 1943? That's right it was purchased in Europe, not discovered in Central America.

as how these skulls are ON DISPLAY at museums..

On display as what, as curios? Which museums are they in? Is it the museum of hoaxes?

The problem is that there are real crystal skulls. They are not the Mitchell-Hedges made in Europe variety of kitsch. They are actual archaeological finds from the Aztecs, and other groups. Do not confuse the real material with the baloney New Age stuff.

and only now they're finding flaws in the idea? Sounds hinky, don't you think?

There are no flaws with the real deal. There have always been flaws with the fake junk espoused by the New Agers. Maybe you are only catching on now to the problem of how hoaxers mess up scientific studies by creating these frauds.

reply to post by Bixxi3


Thanks Bixxi3 for bringing this funny story to light, I am sure you have read the fake rejection letter from the Smithsonian, but for those that haven't this is one of the funniest letters I have read.

Smithsonian Barbie

reply to post by IntelRetard


Exactly. Large quartz crystals can be found in many places. I recall an interesting event a few years back where a road crew blasted into a cavity of huge quartz crystals in Vermont of all places. The place is known for its metamorphics, but here were large crystals of quartz. Arkansas is famous for quartz as are places all across the world. I met a collector in New Hampshire, USA that had 2000 quartz crystals and he wanted more. These were just crystals from the various mountains of New Hampshire.

The British museum tested five skulls in the late 90's, of those skulls were the British museum skull, the Smithsonian skull, the Mexican cross skull and finally max the Texas skull and sha na ra which is the skull in the possession of nick nocerino.

The purpose of the tests were to conclude which of the skulls were modern mock up's and which ones were truly ancient, as in made by the Maya, Aztecs or Incas. They found that four of them, the first four skulls had wheel markings on the teeth, indicating that they were made with modern tools as none of the civilizations had wheels for carving crystal. What was fascinating about the tests though, is that the British museum absolutely refused to comment on the findings for the other two skulls, Max and Sha Na Ra. NO COMMENT. So my thinking is that if they were ancient, they would have said, if they were fakes, they would have said, So I believe that what they found challenged their beliefs, and they were not prepared to comment on the origin of the other two because perhaps they didnt have any idea where they came from? Who knows, but it is very odd.

Just something to chew on.....peace

double postage

Apologies.

reply to post by sir_slide

You can't just say somthing as fact with out proof to back it up
And everyone should read that letter it will give you a good laugh. i wish i could quote some of it here
thanks for sharing

Clams don't have teeth

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by topsykrets89

 

the only thing I find a little strange about them is the cutting against the grain

There is no "grain" to quartz. Break a piece and see that it breaks with a conchoidal fracture. There are no cleavage planes in quartz. I think this claim was made by some bumpkin.

I think you may have to check your facts there buddy. Quartz does have a grain. Here’s a picture of the Mitchel-Hedges scull clearly showing the grain.




And here are some more views on the matter:

There are area's on an intricate carved skull where you simply can not use a grinding wheel anyway! Recent discoveries of Obsidian Disc were unearthed in Egypt that were roughly dated to 5,000 years old with " GRINDING WHEEL MARKS!" How could that be? You just don't hear about it. No one can explain how this skull was done. Ancient potters had wheels they turned by there "FEET!" and why go the the trouble anyway? Why the almost perfect detail?

www.atlanteanskull.com...

A good point there! If the sculls were made on a grinding wheel, how did they get the grinding wheel to the hard to reach places, like the jaw bone or in the hollow sections of the eyes?

So either they were made by a grinding wheel (?) or they were carved over 300 years with diamonds?

Just so we're clear, the correct term for 'agains the grain' is actually "Against the axis of crystallization."

The Crystal Skull of Lubaantum (Belize), a 7-inch-long skull cut from a single piece of clear quartz found among Mayan ruins in 1927. The artisan who fashioned it evidently cut the quartz against the axis of crystallization, a feat no modern jeweler could possibly accomplish without shattering the quartz into fine dust. Moreover, even if the artisan could have accomplished the against-the-grain cut, he cannot have used any metal tools, because his work bears no scratch marks. Analysts have concluded that the production of this artifact would have required 300 man-hours using any conceivable modern method—again, if anyone could have cut the quartz against the grain without shattering it.

And here's the link creationwiki.org...

www.gd-wholesale.com...

reply to post by Monkeygod333

Right. Sure can't cut across that axis. Nope.

Dear customers or vistors, we are a factory in Donghai county China which is the biggest quartz crystal market in China, our factory specialized in natural crystal quartz carving, our carvings include: Figure, animal, skull, sphere, pyramid, points, massage wands, cup and goblet, jewellry pendants...
Please contact us for more information if you are interested in our products.
Thanks for viewing.

www.p-wholesale.com...