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.
Newest Starchild videos
page: 4share:
reply to post by Logical one
sorry my bad
tho seriously this is getting pointless, your just hounding, you have attempted to slander by saying non issue facts such as hes got no science behind him, so what? he seems to be picking it up very well, genealogy is quite the conundrum of a skill, you made the point of the gold jewelry, which was a very poor attempt to debunk, then you basically ignore all that Ive countered with, and seem to be blind to the logic of the 2nd test carried out by well known pros is when the 99 results were changed to bunk. sure it doesn't specifically say that, tho it shouldn't have to, logic tell us the the more qualified people, free of students screwing with there gear and constantly contaminating everything in the labs due to lack of knowledge, have it right, face it, if you cannot understand that, write him an email, hes freely available, and I'm sure he has an answer!
sorry my bad
tho seriously this is getting pointless, your just hounding, you have attempted to slander by saying non issue facts such as hes got no science behind him, so what? he seems to be picking it up very well, genealogy is quite the conundrum of a skill, you made the point of the gold jewelry, which was a very poor attempt to debunk, then you basically ignore all that Ive countered with, and seem to be blind to the logic of the 2nd test carried out by well known pros is when the 99 results were changed to bunk. sure it doesn't specifically say that, tho it shouldn't have to, logic tell us the the more qualified people, free of students screwing with there gear and constantly contaminating everything in the labs due to lack of knowledge, have it right, face it, if you cannot understand that, write him an email, hes freely available, and I'm sure he has an answer!
Originally posted by Logical one
MUCH MUCH more useful if the unnamed geneticist carrying out the tests to be quoted about what he/she thinks the latest findings might mean.
he is the one who told Pye about the two alien parents and the surrogate human and the same type of genetic manipulation we can do today for women with mitochondrial disease.
Originally posted by Logical one
So instead of talking about things we really have little knowledge of...
which is exactly what you are doing. so why don't you either stfu or learn more about this without having it spoon fed? You are not even close to logical nor informed but you seem to like to pose as if you were.
Originally posted by bottleslingguyr learn more about this without having it spoon fed?
You mean unlike your good self being "spoon fed" by MR. Pye!
edit on 21-6-2012 by Logical one because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Logical one
Originally posted by bottleslingguyr learn more about this without having it spoon fed?
You mean unlike your good self being "spoon fed" by MR. Pye!edit on 21-6-2012 by Logical one because: (no reason given)
at least I've taken the time to look at what is on the plate with a completely unbiased mind. you seem to be having a hard time swallowing with your eyes open.
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
at least I've taken the time to look at what is on the plate with a completely unbiased mind. you seem to be having a hard time swallowing with your eyes open.
unbiased ........is that what you really think Pye's mind is?
I am not biased about the star child skull........I based my views on what the published DNA test say about the skull....... and they BOTH say the skull is human.......now how in anyway is that biased?
That's like saying if Germany won a soccer match with England 2-0.........and I stated that Germany won the match .......then I am being biased towards Germany!
edit on 21-6-2012 by Logical one because: (no reason given)
reply to post by Logical one
why are you ignoring the updated information? do you still dispute whether or not the head was cradle boarded? why did you ignore my question regarding Novella and the FOXP2 gene? why will you accept old, wrong, obsolete data instead of the most recent findings? I've never sent Pye a dime. this subject stands on it's own and that's why, when people focus solely on Pye and harp on the earlier information, I know they don't have any other argument. Most logical and intelligent people will eventually catch on to this.
why are you ignoring the updated information? do you still dispute whether or not the head was cradle boarded? why did you ignore my question regarding Novella and the FOXP2 gene? why will you accept old, wrong, obsolete data instead of the most recent findings? I've never sent Pye a dime. this subject stands on it's own and that's why, when people focus solely on Pye and harp on the earlier information, I know they don't have any other argument. Most logical and intelligent people will eventually catch on to this.
reply to post by Logical one
im glad you used soccer as that example, so the argument is 2-nill in your favor. but the first in 'goal' was scored by picking the ball up with your hands and throwing it in (by our own team) and the second is where the ball may be in may be out?? and its only 20% of the ball that exist,
now is a chimp human?? we share allot of DNA with them, so they must be. that is your "logic"
is a pig human??, we can use there organs, so they must be, that is your "logic"
im glad you used soccer as that example, so the argument is 2-nill in your favor. but the first in 'goal' was scored by picking the ball up with your hands and throwing it in (by our own team) and the second is where the ball may be in may be out?? and its only 20% of the ball that exist,
now is a chimp human?? we share allot of DNA with them, so they must be. that is your "logic"
is a pig human??, we can use there organs, so they must be, that is your "logic"
Originally posted by Logical one
Originally posted by easybreezy
oh and another thing if you decided to actually look into this, you'd know that the 93 test was done by students so contamination barley needs to be confirmed, and if you actually looked at the results of the second done by highly reputably scientist they confirmed it with there findings.
I think you mean the 1999 DNA test performed by Dr. David Sweet, Director of the Bureau of Legal Dentistry at the University of British Columbia.
Again who or where is the source that says it was a contaminated test?
please show me source that says no students were involved...
were pye has stated mutable times that they were.WATCH THE VIDEO FFS
even on Williams Shatners show weird or what they interviewed the students
edit on 21-6-2012 by easybreezy because:
spelling
edit on 21-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Logical one
When 2 previous DNA tests conclude that the skull has human DNA.......it's pretty hard prove that it is not human!
DNA is building blocks, just because one part is the same us human, just means that is shares human characteristics, don't make it human.
my Holden VT commodore(car from Australia) has window trims from Canada and a Buick 3800 V6 from America don't make it American, nor Canadian, just a bastard love child of Holden that has characteristics of America and Canada.
edit on 22-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason
given)
Originally posted by Logical one
Let's not all pretend that we are experts on the FOXP2 gene..........
care to prove me wrong???
or does the not compute?
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
talk about a smoking gun? this subject is by far the most tangibly evident of alien intervention on this planet at least as far back as 900 years. early "mythologies" regarding "star people" and children cross-bred with extraterrrestrials can now be taken literally. Who can say what the details or intentions were as far as the way the skeletons were found? that part, for me, is interesting to speculate on because it implies a relationship between the human woman and the being that the skull belonged to. Were they being hunted? What was their relationship? (I am aware they are not genetically related) their arms being tied together with a ribbon makes for an epic hollywood movie as silly as that sounds.
Let's try to keep the discussion on the subject of the videos, please? enjoy
www.youtube.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 16-6-2012 by bottleslingguy because: (no reason given)
You have my attention.
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
why are you ignoring the updated information? why will you accept old, wrong, obsolete data instead of the most recent findings?
Updated information?
Firstly the ONLY so called updated information is from Pye..........so until that information is allowed to be scrutinised by other parties and peers then it is not "updated information" of any real worth.
The data that has been scrutinised by the public & peers are the 2 DNA tests which show the skull is human...........now I keep asking this question but get no answer:
WHO EXACTLY SAYS THE 2 PREVIOUS TESTS ARE INVALID?:
..........I see no evidence of ANYONE saying those results are invalid......... apart from MR. Pye.
Now Pye loves to go into plenty of detail about his beloved skull...........but sadly he seems significantly vague about how he figures the 2 previous DNA tests are invalid........I wonder why!
edit on 22-6-2012 by Logical one because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Logical one
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
not only does the dna show it's not human
Which DNA test shows that?
Care to quote any geneticist that says the DNA shows it's not human........I bet you can't!
www.starchildproject.com... scroll down until you see the bolded title "2011 test results "
Originally posted by Logical one
The data that has been scrutinised by the public & peers are the 2 DNA tests which show the skull is human..........
"public and peers"
Originally posted by Logical one
WHO EXACTLY SAYS THE 2 PREVIOUS TESTS ARE INVALID?:
..........I see no evidence of ANYONE saying those results are invalid......... apart from MR. Pye.
Now Pye loves to go into plenty of detail about his beloved skull...........but sadly he seems significantly vague about how he figures the 2 previous DNA tests are invalid........I wonder why!
edit on 22-6-2012 by Logical one because: (no reason given)
now wouldn't, BOLD, and TRACE GENETIC"S labs, of come out to dispute this by now???
and again your point is invalid... like them apples??
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
Originally posted by Logical one
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
not only does the dna show it's not human
Which DNA test shows that?
Care to quote any geneticist that says the DNA shows it's not human........I bet you can't!
if you cared about knowing the truth you would know Pye has been trying to get more people involved, that's why the documentary and all that. He's looking for an investor who will MAKE money from it.
as far as the majority of geneticists agreeing it's not human, they'd have to be complete morons to not see how different it is just by the results of the FOXP2 gene differences, let alone the morphological structures of the skull, the chemical make-up and the actual structures and residues inside the bone matrix. There is more forensic evidence here to put someone in the gas chamber, don't tell me there's nothing here. You probably have some agenda or maybe it's just fear driven, but your hyperbolic attitude toward Pye, who seems to me to be one hell of a good guy, is very telling that you have some other agenda going on.
I agree, I have seen a lot of his videos and think of him as one of the great and exciting teachers of our time. I really enjoy his videos on so many things such as his passion about the obelisk in Egypt, human creation.
So far from what I have studied not many can compare to his understanding of how we cam to be.
People can knock him all they want but if they do, they can loose a lot of valuable information !
reply to post by thetiler
you should (if you haven't already) read his book, Everything You Know Is Wrong
you should (if you haven't already) read his book, Everything You Know Is Wrong
Originally posted by easybreezy
now wouldn't, BOLD, and TRACE GENETIC"S labs, of come out to dispute this by now???
and again your point is invalid... like them apples??
Err the onus is not on BOLD or TRACE GENETICS to prove that their test were valid.......the onus is on Pye to prove they are invalid...........so far he hasn't proven squat!
Similar to Big Foot hunter who sends Big Foot hair for analysis........only for the hair to be identified as dog hair............ big foot hunter can shout all he wants that the hair test was invalid.........but it is not up to the lab that identified the dog hair to dispute big foot hunters claims...........as far as they are concerned the evidence speaks for itself.........no need to dispute with big foot hunter.
Originally posted by renegadeloser
www.starchildproject.com... scroll down until you see the bolded title "2011 test results "
And the geneticist who says it's not human is?
Originally posted by Logical one
Originally posted by bottleslingguy
do you think he is lying about the dna results? do you still believe the skull is just a deformed human? you said it was interesting- what part is interesting to you?
Well Pye does kinda spin the results to what he wants the star child to be.......i.e an ET.
Firstly when in 2003 they managed to recover Mitochondrial DNA belonging to a Haplogroup C human female, Pye gave lengthy lectures in pseudo-science, saying how the star child must be a alien hybrid, and he made up charts and diagrams to explain how the star child was conceived.
In old specimens such as the 900 year old star child Y chromosome DNA from the father is not always recoverable, but Mitochondrial DNA from the mother's side is much much easier to recover than Y chromosome DNA from the father.
The geneticist who carried out the test in 2003 publicly stated on tv that only the Mitochondrial DNA was recoverable from the star child.
Pye publically went on TV interviews and stated that the 2003 test confirmed that the starchild was from a human mother and the father was "non human".
Errr.......so Pye doesn't lie?
The 2003 results show no such thing........they show that that Y chromosone DNA was not recoverable, which is quite normal in old specimens.
Sorry but suggesting Pye never lies about the starchild is an untuth in itself!edit on 16-6-2012 by Logical one because: (no reason given)
Extremely well said. I was trying to remember what the commotion was about back then, and you refreshed my memory. The thing is that most people do not understand the process of recovering DNA, or what it means once it is sequenced. The results were obviously not what they were looking for, and as you said, pseudoscience, or just bad science, was presented as fact when it was nothing of the sort.
This skull is not alien, I'm sorry to say. And it is strange that they contradict themselves regarding their own evidence. And I find it highly suspicious that it takes millions of dollars to do DNA testing on a single skull. After a couple of different labs have tested it, you either have results or you don't...Usually no further testing is needed. And just because some PhD hasn't seen anything like this before doesn't mean anything. It means very little actually. Also, a word of advice for everyone, not all scientists are on the up and up, as it were. Remember global warming?