A Fragment of the Starchild’s FOXP2 Gene is Recovered

reply to post by Gorman91

I could ask you the same thing about God. Actually that's probably one of the first questions I would ask them, after crapping my pants

reply to post by skepticconwatcher


Great idea but unfortunately very wrong. There were far less deformities in the past because they were immediately killed or sent off when such deformities were found.


Jaden

Originally posted by stealthmonkey
reply to post by bottleslingguy

 

i think the so called star child skull is just a deformed human i think there was a lot of inter breeding back then too which would account for the genetic varriation anomoly and the deformation of the skull

A comparison to fragments of a genome of a person with similar anonmlies would be in order. Good theory. If the scientists working on this project don't have a similar theory they might be a little biased.

Originally posted by earthdude

Originally posted by stealthmonkey
reply to post by bottleslingguy

 

i think the so called star child skull is just a deformed human i think there was a lot of inter breeding back then too which would account for the genetic varriation anomoly and the deformation of the skull

A comparison to fragments of a genome of a person with similar anonmlies would be in order. Good theory. If the scientists working on this project don't have a similar theory they might be a little biased.

it matches nothing in the NIH data bank. the species is more different to us than us compared to frogs

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by earthdude

Originally posted by stealthmonkey
reply to post by bottleslingguy

 

i think the so called star child skull is just a deformed human i think there was a lot of inter breeding back then too which would account for the genetic varriation anomoly and the deformation of the skull

A comparison to fragments of a genome of a person with similar anonmlies would be in order. Good theory. If the scientists working on this project don't have a similar theory they might be a little biased.

it matches nothing in the NIH data bank. the species is more different to us than us compared to frogs

Sorry to still doubt the validity of this sample. I am no genetic scientist but an abundance of genetic material would be more conclusive proof, a complete genome with parts of it mapped.

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by skepticconwatcher

 

Great idea but unfortunately very wrong. There were far less deformities in the past because they were immediately killed or sent off when such deformities were found.


Jaden

This could be the very reason why the mother and "starchild" were killed, and why we now have their remains.

I think the methodology used should be questioned. Only 10% of the FOXP2 gene was mapped and they extrapolated that this would mean a variation of 56 base pairs, and concluded that it was not human.

Why don't they send a bone fragment to an accredited Genetic Lab and get a full gene mapping?

I cited an article where the entire FOXP2 gene was deleted because of a genetic defect. This would mean that the variation was 2,954 base pairs, a bit more than 56. They are still human.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...;jsessionid=C1D31E12F91770295595610D0059D802.d01t04

reply to post by bottleslingguy


If you look at the NIH FAQ regarding BLAST you will find that there's actually a whole section regarding the results Pye received. One of the possible explanations is that the sample did not contain enough usable genetic material. Let's use the test prior to this one as an example. The human genome consists of about 3 billion base pairs. In that test Pye's sample consisted of about 400 base pairs. That is 1.3e-5% of the entire genome. I would say that constitutes an extremely small sample.

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by skepticconwatcher

 

Great idea but unfortunately very wrong. There were far less deformities in the past because they were immediately killed or sent off when such deformities were found.


Jaden

This could be the very reason why the mother and "starchild" were killed, and why we now have their remains.

I think the methodology used should be questioned. Only 10% of the FOXP2 gene was mapped and they extrapolated that this would mean a variation of 56 base pairs, and concluded that it was not human.

Why don't they send a bone fragment to an accredited Genetic Lab and get a full gene mapping?

I cited an article where the entire FOXP2 gene was deleted because of a genetic defect. This would mean that the variation was 2,954 base pairs, a bit more than 56. They are still human.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...;jsessionid=C1D31E12F91770295595610D0059D802.d01t04

While I'm not sure how willing I am to believe that the skull is an alien, I think it's hugely naive to think that a standard lab would want to touch this, or if they did, wouldn't reject any findings that would indicate a non human or extraterrestrial origin due to the fear of being ostracized by the scientific community.

Jaden

reply to post by Masterjaden


You're right, no lab would analyze it and immediately claim extraterrestrial. What they would do is analyze it and come up with results the scientific community can form hypothesis on. Only someone with a vested interest in this being alien would jump to that conclusion, that is not how science works.

If the scientific community can not explain the differences away it strengthens the argument for the skull being extraterrestrial. The only reason this is not being tested by an independent lab is if there is fraud going on.

Originally posted by ButterCookie
S&F

I'm loving the fact that more and more, evidence of extraterrestrials and their interaction with humans (to include the genetic engineering of humans) is continuing to surface

I love it.

And what I hate is that mainstream scientists weren't drooling over getting their hands on this skull in the first place. Isn't science supposed to aim for the truth and not run from it? Okay, so there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe; how does this threaten the leaps we've made in science?

Originally posted by Miccey
So can you guys enlighten me
to WHY this WOULDNT be
EARTH originated...

Even IF its NOT human, what
makes it NON terrestrial....

Just a guess, mind you, but the unknown part of the Starchild's DNA is SO different from human that there is no way a successful sperm-egg connection could have been made without intelligent and deliberate manipulation.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Nicolas Flamel

 

Given the abnormalities of the "Starchild" has anyone considered the differences in the FOXP2 gene are the result of naturally occurring genetic mutations in FOXP2?

One could assume the mother of such a defective primate bathed in a pool of radioactive waste. The number of differences in the FOXP2 gene are so high that if they were defects the thing would never have been born in the first place, and it certainly would have come out looking much worse than that. It'd be like randomly jumbling the sequences and expecting it to come out alive. Just not going to happen.

Right. And if by some extreme miracle this thing lived it's skull wouldn't have been symmetrical.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Gorman91

 

well what about a panspermia type scenario? maybe the seeds of life, that already existed on the other side of this galaxy, were cast about by super nova why would it be impossible for those same "seeds" to grow in a similarly habitable environment? maybe God created life somewhere else and through the eons it finally wound up here? Maybe there are millions of species with humanoid proportions and similar features. We need to get over our exclusivity mind set.

Except that the mitochondrial dna has been declared a human female.

Originally posted by stealthmonkey
reply to post by bottleslingguy

 

i think the so called star child skull is just a deformed human i think there was a lot of inter breeding back then too which would account for the genetic varriation anomoly and the deformation of the skull

That's just it; the skull isn't deformed. It's perfectly symmetrical, not lopsided, nor does it have protrusions that hint of disease.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by GilesCampbell

 

I'm sure if you email Lloyd directly he will answer any questions you have to get you up to speed. He's not hiding anything and welcomes people in this field.

I have emailed Lloyd with a few concerns and his responses were so natural and forthcoming. He didn't ask for any money or use caps to say something like IT'S TRUE!!! BELIEVE IT!!!

He's just a regular guy that had a weird skull fall in his lap, and who had just enough knowledge to know that something wasn't right with it.

One of my concerns was about the story of how the skull and bones were washed downstream in a flood. The skull was recovered, but no one is going crazy trying to find the lost bones. If I remember correctly, Lloyd simply stated that he didn't have the money to go digging for them.

I'd been waiting to see what would come up in DNA testing... but wow! Even though the report is lengthy and I'll have to read the rest later, it seems as if we have something akin to a dead visitor on our hands. Interesting, to say the least. The next question will be what to do with the information once it has been competed. Can or should we attempt to recreate this being along the same lines as they are supposedly working to bring the mammoth back? Should we? I don't know... scary proposition.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


it's more than they had when they determined Neanderthal was not the same species

Oh god, DO NOT look at the artist impression's link on that website, so horrifying. I'm never going to sleep again.

I question veracity. It sounds, like, made up. Is there peer reviewed accepted publications of this research?

But assuming veracity for now, it's so weird that it's only one. Could be genetic deformity mutation? That's what I always thought it was.

reply to post by jiggerj


You're right, they aren't, that should tell you something. If this was real they would be. We have scientists in many fields actively searching for ET life, the idea that somehow finding ET life is anathema to science is ludicrous.

Your guess is not based on valid science. We have a pet geneticist, who has looked at an extremely small portion of a single gene and extrapolated that data to cover the entire gene, and the entire being it belonged to. This data, which has not been verified by any independent sources mind you, would be like me looking at living conditions in a Palestinian slum and saying that is how all humans live. It's not science, no re[utable scientist would make these claims, it's terrible research.

Show me the science behind you opinion it would not have lived? Here is actual science that shows an individual with NO FOXP2 gene.
onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

So the mtDNA comes back human, and we should now believe the father is an Alien somehow? I'm failing to see where fantasy is confirmed by science. So far the only "proof" is the mother is human. That's 1 for a terrestrial explanation and 0 for an ET one.

Show me proof skull deformations can not be fairly symmetrical? I'll even show you mine first.
www.upright-health.com...

Hydrocephalus causes a child's head to enlarge fairly symmetrically like blowing up a balloon.

Being a likeable guy doesn't mean he's not a fraudster, in fact quite the opposite. Most people commiting fraud by necessity are charming. It also doesn't mean he's not a fraud and simply wrong. Now let's use some logic, if this was actually an alien-human hybrid skull, someone would be digging for it, it's not logical to think no one would go after it.

reply to post by DeepThoughtCriminal


No, there is no peer reviewed work, there is not even any independent work. This is all done by Lloyd's in house pet geneticist who tested an extremely minute sample of the gene and extrapolated the results to cover the whole gene. Not only does it reek of fraud, that is some seriously bad science.