A Fragment of the Starchild’s FOXP2 Gene is Recovered

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

IMPORTANT BREAKTHROUGH WITH STARCHILD DNA

www.starchildproject.com

"The fragment of the Starchild's FOXP2 that has been recovered is VASTLY different from the human version! It is unmistakably FROM a FOXP2 gene, and one that is unmistakably human-LIKE, but it is indisputably NOT human"

(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 29-2-2012 by Maxmars because: PLEASE USE THE EXACT TITLE FROM YOUR BREAKING NEWS SOURCE.

I'm a little late to this thread.......but I have posted my views on Lloyd Pye and his "starchild" skull on other threads.
It seems that Lloyd Pye is doing it again..........bringing a "new" snippet of the test he is conducting with an anonymous geneticist, from an anonymous lab...........and once again Pye is spinning his own interpretation of the results..........which wouldn't be so bad.........if he was a geneticist who knew how to interpret the results properly........but Pye isn't a geneticist..... ... hell he isn't even qualified in any of the sciences!

What would be much much more interesting than listening to Pye's spin on the results.........would be a direct quote from the mystery geneticist............why not just call him Dr. X........we may not know the identity of the geneticist..........but at least we should (If Pye was playing fair and directly quoting the geneticist) get a viewpoint from someone that actually knows what he is looking at and how to properly interpret the results.

Let's take a look at what Pye says :

"In all humans, the FOXP2 gene is so incredibly highly conserved that if we are "normal," our FOXP2 gene is identical---exactly the same!---in ALL OF US! There is not so much as a smidgen of difference because mutations usually kill us. Not always, but when they don't kill, they inevitably leave devastation in their wake.

The fragment of the Starchild's FOXP2 that has been recovered is VASTLY different from the human version! It is unmistakably FROM a FOXP2 gene, and one that is unmistakably human-LIKE, but it is indisputably NOT human, no matter how you slice it. So this is as much a home run as home runs get! "

You can't get any more contradictory than that!
first Pye says :"FOXP2 gene is identical---exactly the same!---in ALL OF US!"
but then goes on to say:
"There is not so much as a smidgen of difference because mutations usually kill us. Not always"
in other words there is the possibility of genetic mutation, so it is not ALWAYS the case that the gene is identical in all of us.

Now given that the "star child" looks different from a "normal" skull, then it would be a safe bet to conclude that the "star child" had some type of mutation..........so it kinda follows that the FOXP2 gene could well be mutated.

So what can we REALLY conclude........not much, only that the child seems to have a mutated FOXP2 gene...........big deal Pye!

reply to post by Logical one


Actually it's far worse. They only examined an extremely small portion of the FOXP2 gene and then extrapolated those results to conclude it is vastly different. Like everything else he does, this is meaningless, and fairly dirty.

Hate to say I told you so but ...

The Starchild Skull was confirmed to be 100% human.

thefieldreportscom.wordpress.com...